ΘΕΑΝΘΡΩΠΟΣ OR THE Great Mystery OF GODLINESS, Opened By way of Antidote against The Great Mystery of Iniquity, (now a work in the Romish Church.)  
In a Sound and Seasonable Treatise; WHEREIN 1. The INCARNATION of the Son of God (and Evangelicall Love, Wisdom, Humility, etc. expressed in that Contrivance) is fully explicated and displayed. 2. CEREMONIES in Point of Divine Worship are concluded to be by Christ (the true Messiah) abrogated; and examined whether they are not since Christ, Jewish-Anti-Christian; where the Jew and Judaizing Christian are deservedly taxed. 3. CHRISTIAN LIBERTY with its VIII Steps and V Boundaries, is modestly and briefly asserted; And Many other Matters of Consequence and Moment are imparted: But now PUBLISHED For VINDICATION of the Truth and its Assertor. By Thomas Douglas, M. A. Minister of the Gospel at Olaves-Silverstreet, in LONDON.  The LAW was given by MOSES, but GRACE. and TRUTH came by JESUS CHRIST, John 1. 17. Praesente Veritate, Typus & Vmbra cessavit. Origen. in Jes. Nave. cap. 13. hom. 17. 
LONDON; Printed for H. C. in Popes-head Alley, and T. P. against the great Conduit at the lower end of Cheapside. Ann. Dom. 1661.   

An Epistle PREMONITORY To the JUDICIOUS And Impartial Reader.  
Worthy Reader,  
BE pleased to know, that I once intended an Epistle Reprehensory to the Romish Church, the Whorish Mother of THE MYSTERY of INIQUITY (for there it was Born though her Pharisaical Emissaries would compass Sea and Land, that it might be elsewhere Nursed) but upon more mature thoughts, I concluded to be at the expense of no more than this Epistle Premonitory; whose Scope and Errand is to acquaint the World with the Occasion of this (my first) appearance in Print.  
I am now by Personal Experience schooled in the Truth of that, Veritas odium parit. Never was there an Age, wherein TRUTH had more Daughters, and fewer Sisters; But the misery is, the Brood is ILLEGITIMATE, and HETEROGENEAL.  
I was about two months ago brought to Pulpit of some honest Truths (suitable to the Text, as that was to the Occasion) which were CONCEIVED (I hope) by a DIVINE (though now necessitated to a (Printed) Sheet by a MALIGNANT) Influence. And though (the Lord knows) my Discourse was all along leveled and commensurated (as near as I could) by the Necessary Laws of 1. Piety, in respect of my God. 2. Loyalty in respect of my King; and 3. Charity, in respect of my Neighbour; Yet have (innocent) I, been since, in such a 
O how sad is it, when what is said for Antidoting of Superstition is presently construed to be (at least) Sedition!  horrid manner, by some (whom God forgive) censured, condemned, calumniated, and misrepresented (what their ground was, let the Impartial judge) as that (fearing lest Silence might be Interpreted Gild, a pleasing Gloss, in such a case, to Malice) I concluded, it was needful to Publish to the world, what I delivered, (with divers other things) Innocency and Ingenuity, those Bosome-Solicitors, prompting me on; for VINDICATION.  Hic murus Aheneus esto, etc. 
Thus,  
What the Reason and End of the Publication is, I have showed; That the work is performed no better, let it be imputed to Mine, and not to the Weakness of my Cause, for that is not Guilty; neither let Men make use of Mine as Premises to Infer other men's Weaknesses. Alas! I am less than the least of ten thousand. No marvel the Birth be condemned as Abortive, since the Parent is one born out of due time. I confess the Subject had better become both Age and Ability; but though the want of both, (especially of the latter) did incline me to stand for a Mute, yet the Case was so urgent, that it pressed hard for a Consonant. What Censures soever I shall undergo, even while I endeavour to suppress or prevent Censures, I am resolved (through Grace) to be Passive under them; Only my Suit is to thee (Worthy Reader) that thou wouldst 1. Forbear to Tax me (further) till thou hast read me through; (and then I hope, thou wilt not Tax thy Forbearance:) And 2. Pray for him, who is  
Thy Servant in and for Christ, T. D.   

Praemonitiuncula.  
LIbenter velim Eruditioribus innotescat, passim in hoc opusculo Graecum Accentum, perperam collocari, quod partim Typographo, vitio vertendum est, partim mihi ipsi, utpote qui a teneris usque, Vocalis, Valorcm, magis quam Accentum respicere memet assuefecerim; quae Legenti maximopere praemonenda esse duxi; ut illius facilior evadat censura; cui, si (nihilominus) steterit MOMUM agere; per me (quidem) licebit.   
Gal. 4. 4, 5. 
But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law.  
To redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the Adoption of sons.  
THe Apostle's design in the Context, is to demonstrate the Christian Churches Exemption and Redemption from Legal Rites and Ceremonies, and her emancipation from a servile state by the Son of God Incarnate, the true Messiah.  
This he illustrates by a plain and familiar Simile, taken from the Civil Law; the sum is this. As the Heir while he is under age, and in his minority, is subject to Tutors, Governors, and Guardians, from which he is freed, when he comes at age, being then sui juris, at his own disposal; even so the Church, under her Legal Constitution, and Minority, was subject to the Mosaical pedagogy, and Ceremonial Shadows, Pigures, etc. as to a Schoolmaster, and Rudiments, suited to her Infant-State; but when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, made under the Law, to redeem them that were under the Law. So that the Church in her mature and adult age, and under her Christian and Evangelical Constitution, is by Christ, God-man, the prefigured Body and Substance of Levitical shadows, exempted from the servile yoke of Jewish Rites and Ceremonies. The words than are Demonstrative, and in them there be two general parts, viz.  

1. Christ's Person.  
2. Christ's Portion.   
1. The Person of Christ, considered as our Mediator, lieth in these words; But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the Law. Where there be two great things observable, viz.  

1. The Incarnation of the Son of God.  
2. The Legal Qualification of his Person. 

1. The former, in these words; But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman.  
2. The latter, in these words; made under the Law: whereby is intimated Christ's humble (but 
* Notat, Non Obligationem, sed usum. Anselm  voluntary) subjection to the Law; which was threefold.     
1. The first was his submission to the Civil or Judicial Law, the Jewish Policy; in that he condescended to derive his humane Body and Being from the Jews, for the Jews were the Fathers of whom, as concerning the Flesh, Christ came, Rom. 9 5. Christ was a Native Jew, and therefore subject to the Jewish Policy.  
2. The second was his subjection to the Ceremonial Law, and thus Christ was Circumcised, Luke 2. 21. It was in pursuance of this Law, that Christ went up three times in the year to Jerusalem, to wit, at Festival Solemnities; according to that in Exod. 23. v. 14. Deut. 16. v. 16. etc.  
3. The third was Christ's Obediential Conformity to the Moral Law, which was twofold, viz.  

1. Original.  
2. Actual.   
1. The former was the Native Righteousness of Christ's Person: Christ is the only Person that was born holy; Adam was created holy, every Believer is in sanctification made holy; but Christ (the immaculate Lamb of God) was born holy.  
2. The latter, was Christ's Actual Obedience, which again was twofold, viz.  

1. Active.  
2. Passive.   
1. That was the Legal Righteousness and Obedience of his Life, answering to the Active condition of the Law, Do this and Live.  
2. This was Christ's Passive Undertake in behalf of Mankind; it implies, his voluntary submission to the Curse and Malediction of the Law, to a miserable life, and an accursed death, to a Cross and a Curse at once, (not only nostro bono, but even nostro loco, in our room; which the Socinians deny) in answer to the penal demands of a violated Law, and the Threats and Comminations annexed. In a word, the Apostle in saying Christ was made under the Law, doth intimate, the Quality and Nature of his Estate of Humiliation.  
Use. This should stir us all up to thankful admiration; O the wonderful condescension of God, Christians! What? That He who made the Law, should be made under the Law! That the Sceptre Royal, and Legislative Power of Heaven should stoop to Obedience! Here the Lawmaker was made under the Law! Here God was subject to his Subjects Law. This is the only case wherein (be it spoken with reverence) 
* In forma fervi scipso minor est Aug. de Trin. lib. 1. cap. 7.  God was subject to Himself; O Beloved! This is at once matter both of Thankfulness and wonder.  
2. Christ's Portion lieth in these words, To redeem them that were under the Law, that we might receive the Adoption of sons. This was the great design and Love-plot of the Son of God in assuming to himself our Nature; here are specified two great Captial Privileges accrueing to Believers from and by the Son of God Incarnate, viz.  

1. Redemption.  
2. Adoption. Of which hereafter.   
The Theme that I intent to pitch upon and prosecute, is the Incarnation of the Son of God, That great Mystery 
1 Tim. 3. 16.  of Godliness, the very Sunshine of the Gospel, and all Evangelical contrivances, in the Application whereof, I may very pertinently take into consideration those signal Benefits, viz. Redemption and Adoption.  
But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman.  
Here is asserted the Incarnation of the Son of God; where we have four Observables; viz.  

1. The Subject Matter out of which Christ's Body was made.  
2. The Manner of the production of it.  
3. The Father's Commission.  
4. The Circumstance of Time when, etc.   
1. The Subject Matter out of which Christ's Body was made, was the very substance of the Virgin Mary, its Material and Passive Principle; she was the 
* Vox Hebr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 & Gr. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 notant Sexum aeque ac conditionem. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Procopius.  woman mentioned in the Text. In Virginem introducendum erat Dei Verbum, exstructorium vitae, ut quod per ejusmodi Sexum abierat in perditionem, per eundem Sexum redigeretur in salutem. Tertul. lib. de Carne Christi.  
2. The Manner of the production of Christ's Body, is intimated in the word Made,— Made of a woman.  
It is observable that the Son of God is here said to be * made, and not 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   
1. Begotten of a woman. Christ as God was not Made but Begotten; Christ as Man, was not Begotten, but Made. Nor  
2 Born of a woman. Valentinus, Schwenckfeldius, Martion, the primitive Anabaptists, Familists, etc. did grant that Christ was born of the Virgin Mary, but denied that his Body was made of the Real substance of the Virgin; now saith our Apostle (by the impulse of the holy Ghost) The Son was not (only) born, but made of a woman.  
In a Word;  
In that the Son of God is here said (not to be begotten, nor to be born, but) to be made of a woman; we may gather, That  
1. Christ's Body was a Real Body, and a true Corporeal substance, and not a mere Phantasm, or Imaginary Body, as Martion, and after him the Manichees did affirm; the first Author of which Heresy was Cerdo, saith 
* Tom. 6. lib. de haeres.  S. Augustine.  
2. This Real Body was made of the very Matter and Corporeal substance of the Virgin Mary; and not a Celestial, , or Elementary substance, conveyed into the world, modo transmeatorio, through the Virgin's womb or Belly, tanquam per canalem 
* Si Maria non filium sed hospitem in utero gestabat jesum, quomodo dixit Elizabetha, Beatus fructus Uteri tui? etc. Tertul. lib. de Carne Christi.  vel hospitium, as through a channel or hespitage, per Virginem, non, ex Virgin; as the Valentinians and Schwenckfeldians vainly conceit.  
3. Excluditur concursus Maris; the concurrence of the Male Sex, and by consequence, Natural Generation, and sinful propagation is excluded. Christ was ab Adamo, but not per Adamum. As sin and misery came by a Woman, made of a Man, without a Mother; so happiness and salvation came by a Man, made of a Woman without a Father. Eve was from Adam without a Mother; Christ came of 
* Therefore Mary is truly defined to be 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, and Dei para.  Mary without a (Natural) Father. So that damnable was the opinion of Ebion, viz. That the Body of Christ was procreated of Joseph's Seed; as also that of Helvidius, viz. That Christ was not born of a Virgin, he denied the Virginity of the Mother of our Lord.  
The Son of God did assume to himself the Nature of 
Assumpsit Deus naturam peccatorum, non naturam peccatricem.  Sinners, (but) not a sinful Nature. The Corporeal substance which he took to him, was free from all impurity, and corrupted Qualities, by the omnipotent virtue of the holy Ghost, the Active Principle, (as Aquinas) and Efficient Cause thereof; by the Preparatory Acts of whose purifying and sanctifying power, the Bodily substance was fitted for Personal Union with the Godhead: for the 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Damascen. lib. 3. Orthodoxa Fidei, cap. 2.  holy Ghost did come upon the blessed Virgin, and the Power of the Highest did overshaddow her; Luke 1. 35. And thus we professedly believe that Christ was conceived of the holy Ghost, viz. not as a Material cause, but as a supernatural Effective and sanctifying Cause; non de substantia, sed de potentia; non generatione, sed fussione, & benedictione. Aug. Serm. 6. de Tempore.  
So that Christ's Conception in the womb of the Virgin, was without all exception pure and immaculate.  
3. The Father's Commission is specified in these words, God sent forth his Son; This is the Authority of the Son's undertaking, it is no less than that of Heaven, and the blessed Trinity; He did not assume our Nature without a special Commission: Which may condemn those that run when they are not sent forth into the great work of the Ministry, and irregular engaging therein. The Son of God himself came not in the flesh without a Commission, his undertaking was 
* Dispensatio authentica. Musculus in locum.  Authentic. God sent forth his Son, etc. which argues not an inferiority of Nature to the Father, but only a Voluntary subjection in state and condition; now an in-equality of condition, and a co-equality of Nature, a Natural Parity, and a Voluntary Disparity, are not inconsistent.  
4. The circumstance of Time, when the Son of God came in the flesh, is intimated in these words; When the fullness of the time was come, etc. Where it may be enquired, What are we to understand by the fullness of the time, or the full time?  
Answ. Aquinas notes here a threefold fullness, viz. 
Annus Incarnationis est Lambardo. Annus benignitatu, lib 3 Sent. Dist. 1.  1. Of Grace. 2. Of Promises. 3. Of Types, and Legal shadows. In a word.  
By the fullness of the time, we are to understand tempus praesinitum a Patre, (say the 
* Ambrose. Carnel. a lap. Estius. Luther. Calvin.  Learned) the time appointed of the Father, (as it is in v. 2.) and 
* Divina ordinatione non fatali necessitate. Aquin.  infallibly destined for the manifestation of his Son in the flesh, and the Redemption of his Church from the Legal yoke and bondage of Jewish Rites and Ceremonies, by Him, of whom these were Typical Shadows and Adumbrations.  
This fullness of time, notes the accomplishment of all Prophetical Predictions and Promises of the coming of the Messiah, and the abrogation of all Legal shadows and Figures whereby he was typified.  
But more particularly, for our more distinct knowledge, of what is meant by the fullness of the time.  The Son of God did take upon him our Nature, 
1. A little before the end of Daniel's seventy weeks, mentioned Dan. 9 24, 25. which contain from the end of the Babylonish Captivity till the death of Christ, (as is una voce granted by Chronologers) four hundred and ninety years. 
* De Incarnate. lib, 2. Quaest. 6.  Zanchy is of opinion, that about the space of thirty and three years (the time of Christ's bodily commoration in the world) before the end of the seventy weeks, the Son of God came in the flesh. I confess it were the more remarkable, if Christ and Daniel's seventy weeks did both expire together.  
2. Under the Roman Empire, which was the fourth Monarchy, mentioned Dan. 2. In the time of Augustus Caesar, Christ was born in the 42d year of his Reign, say Epiphanius and Eusebius; in the 41st, say Tertullian and Irenaeus.  
3. Three thousand and nine hundred years from the Creation of the World; this is undoubted: but what the particular year of the Incarnation of the Son of God was, is variously resolved upon by 
* Bullinger. ann. 3970. Funccius, ann. 3965. Melanchthon ann. 3965. Luther, ann. 3960. etc.  Chronologers; but 
* Chron. Genevae Edit. Anno Christi 1575. lib. 3. cap. 7. & 8. Notus Christus anno Mundi 2929. Aequinoct. Autumnali, ab Vrbe condita, anno. 752. anno 4. Olympiad. 194. etc.  Beroaldus his computation is most received, as the exactest of all. According to his Calculation, Christ was born in the year of the World 3929. in the year of Augustus Caesar his Reign 42. in the year of Herod's Reign 33. at or about the Autumnal Equinoctial, etc. This was (according to him) the fullness of the time mentioned in the Text; even the set and predestinated time of the Manifestation of the Son of God in the flesh, and the Church's Immunity and Exemption from a servile-state by and through him.  
Quest. But why did the Son of God come in the flesh at that time of all others? Why not sooner? Why not later?  
Answ. This is a curious Question; (Hidden things belong unto God,) but were we to resolve it, we could assign no other reason for it, then To Velle Divinum, the absolute good pleasure of the Alwise God, who in his great wisdom, pitched upon this season as most proper and convenient for the manifestation of his Son to the World in our Nature. Men can but admire the Wisdom of God in this Circumstance, as well as in the thing. From Aquinas we may reverence the Wisdom of God in this in two respects. 1. Christ was a great person, (though he came not in great State) the King of Saints, the Sovereign Majesty of Heaven, (though he came not into the World in Majesty) therefore it was fit that some preparation (of some thousands of years) should be made for his coming into the world, especially in the hearts of the little World. 2. Christ was a Physician, the Physician of souls, therefore it was fit that his coming should be deferred for some thousands of years after his Patients indispensable need of him; that so, though his Merits were of perfect virtue and efficacy for the salvation of believing sinners, from the beginning of the world, yet) they might insatiably long after even his Bodily appearance, and inestimably prise him when come. The Old-Testament Saints might have come to this, O that the Deliverer were come out of Zion! O that our Physician were once come! When shall the promised Seed of the woman come? O how acceptably did the Son of God appear in a Body in the 
* Heb. 1. 2.  last days, to the sinful, undone, captive sons of men.  

* De Incarnate. lib. 2. Quaest. 6.  Zanchy after many pious and solid reasons given for the conveniency and seasonableness of the fullness of the time for the Son's assumption of our Nature, doth well observe, That this was, of all others, the fittest season for God's producing to the world at once two most signal instances, viz. of Justice and Mercy: Of Justice towards the rebellious and unbelieving Jews, (once God's peculiar people) in rejecting of them: Of Mercy towards the Gentiles; in electing and making choice of them for his Christian Church; and in 
* Gen. 9 27. Hic (jesus) in novissimis temporibus apparens, lapis summus angularis, in unum collegit, & univit, eos qui long & eos qui prope, hoc est circumcisionem & praeputium, dilatans Japhet, constituens eum in domo Sem. Iren. adver. Haeres. lib. 1.  persuading Japhet to dwell in the Tents of Shem.  
O the profound depth of the Wisdom of God How unsearchable are his judgements? His ways past finding out.  
Thus the words of the Text have been in a Theological manner divided and opened.— When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman.  
In the words, this great Evangelical Truth lieth clear, viz. That  

Doctr. Dominus noster in novissimus temporibus venit ad nos, non quemadmodum ipse poterat, sed quomodo illum videre nos poteramus. Iren. advers. haereses, lib. 4.  The Son of God was in the fullness of the time, (viz. sixteen hundred and sixty years ago) according to the determinate and infallible counsel of God's Will, made of a woman.  
In the prosecution of my intended Discourse, this shall 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  be my method. 1. I shall first discover what is comprehended under that, viz. That the Son of God was made of a woman. 2. I shall next prove, That the Son of God was made of a woman, and that in the fullness of the time. 3. I shall in the third place allege the principal Reasons why the Son of God was made of a woman. And 4. Lastly, I shall endeavour to bring this down to Use and Application.  
1. As touching the first.  
The import of that, viz. That the Son of God was made of a woman, is very comprehensive; for this is the great gospel-mystery of the Incarnation, wherein the Son of God did assume to himself the Humane Nature, and so became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God-man in one Person.  
This Assumption of our Nature, considered in a full Extent and Latitude, may be understood to comprehend under it two memorable things. viz.  

1. Union.  
2. Communion.   
1. Union.  
There is a Hypostatical and Personal Union between the Divine and Humane Natures in Christ. The Son of God, though for Nature, Coessential; for Dignity Coequal; for Time, Coeternal with the Father; did notwithstanding assume the Human Nature into a Personal Union with the God head.  
This Personal Union is the most intimate Conjunction of the Manhood with the Godhead in 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Dam. lib. 3. cap. 2.  Christ, wherein those two whole perfect and distinct Natures are without 1. Conversion of the one into the other; Or 2. Composition of a Third by both; Or 3. Confusion and mixture, inseparably conjoined in one Person; which Person is 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. id. Cum legitur, Verbum caro factum est, in verbo intelligo verum Dei filium; in carne agnosco verum hominis filium, & utrumque simul, unam personam, etc. Aug. de Trin. lib. 13.  very God, and very Man, (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉,) yet (but) one Christ, the only Mediator between God and Man.  
The two Natures of Christ are united,  
1. * 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without any change or mutation in the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 Dam. Assumpsit (filius) carnem, non se conversit in carnem, Aug. Verbum caro factum est, non in carnem mutatum, ut non desisteret esse quod erat, sed caperit esse quod non erat. Id. Dial. ad. Orosium.  Divine Nature, or conversion of the one Nature into the other; and therefore damnable was the opinion of Apollinaris, who stuck not to affirm a kind of alteration in the Divine Nature.  
2. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without Division; contrary to Nestorius, 
Accessit Deo hum ana substantia non persona. Fulg.  who alleged (not a distinction, but) a division between the two Natures of Christ, attributing to each Nature its proper hypostasis; and so obtruded to the world an Union of Persons, instead of a Personal Union; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, non 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉; a Social, not a Personal Conjunction.  
This Nestorian heresy was anathematised by the first 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Justin. Imper. contess. Rectae Fidei.  Ephesin Council, under Theodosius the younger, and Celestine the first, whereof Cyril was Precedent, anno Christi 430.  
There is in Christ Aliud & Aliud, but not Alius & Alius; two Natures, but one Individual Person.  
3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, without confusion and mixture, or a composition of a Third Nature by both; Christ's two Natures remain still distinct by their several Essential Proprieties, contrary to Eutyches, and (after him) Dioscorus, who alleged a mixture in the two Natures; so that according to them, Christ is a compound made up of the Divine and Humane Natures intermixed.  
This Eutychian heresy was anathematised by the Council of Chalcedon (which was the fourth cecumenical 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc. Dam. lib. 3. cap. 3. vid. Dam, lib. 3. cap. 2.  Council) Act. 5. under Martian and Leo the first, anno Dom. 451.  
4. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Inseparably. Christ's two Natures are indissolubly conjoined. The Personal Union is a Perpetual Union. That Nature (Christians) which the Son of God did sixteen hundred years ago, assume into Hypostatical Union with the Godhead, is by an everlasting conjunction united to him. And certainly this will be matter of everlasting joy and wonder, to the consanguinal Saints in Heaven.  
This is the Nature of the Personal Union of the Deity and Humanity in Christ. Super hac re, vid. Symb. Antioch. Nicen. Constantinop. Athan. Chaleed. Act. 5. & Dam. lib. 3. cap. 2.  
From this Personal Union of the Humane with the Divine Nature in Christ, follows 1. A Mutual Communion of Proprieties, wherein what is proper to either of the Natures, is attributed to the whole Person; as in these Scriptures, No man hath ascended up to heaven, but he that came down from heaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven. John 3. 13. The Church hath God purchased with his own blood. Acts 20. 28. God will judge the world by that man whom he hath ordained. Acts 17. 31. and such like. 2. The Excellency of the Humane Nature, both in respect of the gifts, (as Wisdom, Knowledge, Power, etc.) with which he was qualified for his Mediatorship; and the honour and adoration due unto it by virtue of its Union with the Godhead. 3. The Concurrence of both Natures, in operibus Theandricis, in the works which Christ produceth as God-Man, wherein both Natures cooperate; each Nature contributing its own.  
2. Communion.  
There is a threefold Communion between Christ and Mankind, viz.  

1. A Communion of Natures.  
2. A Communion of Properties.  
3. A Communion of Infirmities.   
1. There is a Mutual Communion of Natures and Essential Parts between Christ and Man. The Son of God did assume to himself, the true Essentials of Man, viz. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Symb. Chalced. Act. 5.  The Entire substance of a Real Body, and a Reasonable Soul, the very Humane Nature; so that Christ is Consubstantial with Us, as well as with the Father. 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Symb. Chalced. ibid.   
This is a Communion of Essential Parts.  
2. There is between Christ and Mankind a Communion of Essential Properties; the Son of God did assume the Powers of Life, Sense, Motion; the Faculties of Reason, Will, and Affection; a Body with its just Quantity and Trin-dimension; even all the Natural Properties of Man, considered as a Corporeal, Animal, Sensitive, Reasonable Creature.  
3. There is between Christ and Mankind a Communion of Infirmities: The Son of God did assume not only our Natures and Essential Properties, but also our Infirmities, viz.  
1. Natural.  
Not Personal Infirmities; Those were such as do generally accompany the Humane Nature, as its common Attendants since Man's fall and prevarication from his Primitive Integrity; and they were of two sorts; viz. 1. Body-Infirmities; as heat, cold, hunger, thirst, sleep, etc. 2. Soul-Infirmities; as grief, anguish and sorrow, fear, ignorance, etc. (I mean 
* Ignorantia pura Negationis. Non ignoravit aliquid privative quod tenebatur scire, sed nescivit negative, absque peccato, quod aetati 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 conditioni non competebat. Dr. Prideaux Manuduct. ad Theol. Polem. loc. 3. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Dam. lib. 3. cap. 21.  Negative Ignorance; that was ignorance (not of that which he ought ex officio to have known; but of that which was not congruous for him quoad statum, according to his condition to know; and thus Christ is said to be ignorant of the particular day and hour wherein he himself is to come to judge the world, (Mark 13. 32.)  
These, and such like infirmities did the Son of God take upon him, but not men's Personal infirmities, as blindness, lameness, dropsies, gouts, consumptions, etc. which are not universal, or necessary concomitants of the Humane Nature, but attend upon Persons, rather than upon the Nature, and proceed from some particular causes, as the malignity of the Constitution, the inequality of the Temperament, the predominancy of some corrupted humour, or such like, not incident to Christ.  
2. 
* 
Christus similu suit carni nostra peccatrici n●n in culpa sed in p●na. Lombar. Sent. lib. 3. dist. 3. lit. D.  
Infirmitates miserabiles, non damnabiles, poenales, non Peccatrices. Dr. Prid. Montidust. ad Theol. Polem. loc. 3. Infirmitates merae privationis, non pravae dispositionis.   Penal.  
Not sinful infirmities; Christ's infirmities were miserable, but not damnable; the infirmities of sinners, but not the infirmity of sin; which is not only an imperfection, but an infection; now Christ was the holy and just One, free from all (both) Natural and Personal guilt.  
Christ was by way of Passion here on earth (as he is now by way of compassion in heaven) touched with the feeling of our infirmities (yet) 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Symb. Chalced. Inter Trinitatem & hominum infirmitatem & iniquitatem, Mediator factus est homo, non iniquus, sed tamen infirmus, ut ex eo quod non iniquus jungeret te Deo, ex quod infirmus, propinquaret tibi. Aug. Praes. in enarrat. 2. Psal. 29.  without sin, Heb. 4. 15. Christ did partake of our infirmities, but not of our iniquities.  
The Son of God was in all things made like unto his Brethren, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Dam. lib. 3. cap. 20.  but that wherein (we) his Brethren are like unto Satan. In a word, Christ's Infirmities were wholly inculpable.  
2. As to the second thing proposed;  
That the Son of God was made of a woman, and is already come in the flesh, is a truth which runs clear in the veins of the Gospel, as the great Theme thereof.  
The 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  Word was made flesh, John 1. 14. He was made in the likeness of Men, and found in fashion as a Man, Phil. 2. 7, 8. In him dwelleth the fullness of the Godhead bodily, Col. 2. 9 For as much as the children are partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of the same, Heb. 2. 14. Verily, he took upon him the seed of Abraham, Heb. 2. 16. He was made of a woman, Gal. 4. 4. etc.  
From these and such like Scripture proofs it is evident, that the Son of God was made of a woman, he being the only true Messiah who was promised from the beginning, and prophesied to come in our Nature; which yet the incredulous Jew will by no means admit of, what is Gospel-testimony to him? But  
2. This Truth is also clear from the manifest accord and consent of the Evangelist St Luke his History of the Nativity of Christ, with the Prophetical Predictions, concerning 1. The particular Time of the Messiah his coming, Gen. 49. 10. 2. His Family and Pedigree, Jer. 23. 5. 3. His Virgin-Mother, Isa. 7. 14. 4. His Country, Mic. 5. 2. 5. His Condition, Isa. 53. 2. which is apparent to any that compare them together. Yea,  
3. The 1. Prophesied places of the Messiah, 1. His Birth. 2. Education, 3. Teaching. 4. Suffering, are destroyed; and 2. The prophesied time of his coming is elapsed; Ergo, etc. It was prophesied  
1. That Christ should be born in Bethlehem, Mic. 5. 2.  
2. That he should be brought up in Nazareth, Isa. 11. 1.  
3. That he should enter into Jerusalem while the second Temple was yet standing, Hag. 2. 7. 9 & Zech. 9 9 compared; and in this sense it was said, and verified that the glory of the second Temple should exceed the glory of the first Temple.  
4. And that under the fourth Monarchy, Dan. 2. 44. That was the Roman Empire, which together with the other three, viz. the Syrian, Persian, and Grecian, were subverted by him, the King of Kings, The Stone out out of the Mountain, Dan. 2. 45. whose Kingdom is firm and everlasting, and destructive to all Kingdoms contrary to it.  
5. That the Sceptre should not departed from Judah, nor a Lawgiver from between his feet, till Shiloh (that is, the Messiah) came, Gen. 49. 10. But Bethlehem, Nazareth, Jerusalem, and the Temple, are razed and destroyed; the fourth Monarchy is totally subverted; The Sceptre is wholly taken away and departed from Judah. For the better understanding whereof we must know, that the Sceptre (that is, the Jewish Form of Government) continued until the time of Herod the Ascalonite (an Idumean) 
Vid. Joseph. Antiqu. lib. 14.  a Proselyte-Jew, who began to reign in Judea about thirty and three years before the Nativity of our Saviour, being created King of Jury by the Roman Senate; He in the thirtieth year of his Reign, slew the Jewish Sanhedrin, (a Convocation in whom did reside the Legislative pre-eminence) and so deprived the Jews of the Sceptre and Principality, and defaced their Government, (which was afterwards at the destruction of Jerusalem, with all their Fundamental Laws, and Civil Customs, and Rites, utterly abolished, insomuch that there remained no form nor face of a Commonwealth at all among them, as before.) Now near upon this time, Shiloh (that is, the Messiah) came, being lineally descended of the Royal Tribe of Judah; Ergo, etc. Nay,  
4. Not only Prophetical Predictions concerning the Messiah, but even the Messiah his own Predictions are fulfilled. O that the poor Jew would hearken to this! Had I to do with a Jewish Synagogue, I should hope (through strength from the Almighty) to urge this Argument with good success; not only Prophecies concerning Christ, but Christ's own Prophecies and Personal Predictions are accomplished. What? Did he not in the days of his 
Matth. 24. 2. Luk. 19 43, 44.  flesh prophesy concerning the Temple, That there should not be left one stone upon another, which should not be thrown down? And did he not foretell with tears in his eyes, the future desolation and depopulation of Jerusalem? O Jerusalem, Jerusalem! etc.— Behold your house is left unto you desolate. And was not this accordingly fulfilled not long after? It was accomplished some forty years after Christ's Ascension by Vespasian the Emperor, and his Son Titus, say Eusebius and Josephus. It is a strange thing to me (but that Unbelief is become Penal, a curse as well as a sin) that the Jews are not convinced from the very (vocally-silent) Ruins of their Temple and Metropolis. Oh Lord convince them!  
3. As touching the third thing proposed, viz.  
The Reasons why the Son of God did take upon him our Nature.  
1. The Prime Impulsive cause hereof was, a Principle 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  of free and infinite Love. That Intrinsecal Motive, and Primum Mobile of all Evangelical Contrivances. The Assumption of our Nature into Personal Union with the Godhead, was the prime piece of God's gracious design and Love-plot concerning sinners. The Son of God was induced thereunto ab intra, from an impulse of Omnipotent Love; By this the whole Trinity was (as it were) overpowered. God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, etc. John 3. 16. Love was Mightier than the Almighty: Here God was his own Captive; (be it spoken with reverence.) Sure, there was a strange Omnipotency in Love. O wonderful Love! The most powerful Motive with God in God The Project of Man's salvation was a Love-plot; It was laid in Love; It was carried on in Love, It was accomplished in Love: The Son of God did out of Love to our Persons assume our Natures. The Incarnation was purely the Product of Infinite Affection; That than which moved the Son of God to  the Deity with flesh and blood (as I may express it) and to take upon him our Nature, was not 1. Any Meritorious Qualification in Man; O no! We could as soon have merited Salvation as a Saviour, and so there had been no need of God-Incarnate. Nor was it 2. Any Created Excellency; O no! So Angels had been Gainers, and Men irrecoverably Losers; whereas (admired be rich Grace) God took not upon him the Nature of Angels, but the Seed of Abraham, Heb. 2. 16. But it was purely an Internal Principle of free, boundless, and illimited Love. This (Beloved) is a Reason far above Reason.  
2. A second Reason why the Son of God was made of a woman, may be drawn from  
The Nature of Christ's Mediatory Office.  
It was proper and requisite that the Son of God undertaking the Office of Surety and Mediatorship between God and Man, should partake of both Natures; the Humane as well as the Divine, and so become 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God-Man, else he had not been duly qualified thereunto; Hence Christ is a Mediator, not only qua Medians, in respect of Office; but also qua Medius, in respect of the Concurrence of the Divine and Humane Natures in Him. Christ as he is God, bears a Proportion to his Father's Majesty; In Christ as he is Man, there is a propinquity to our Meanness. In a word, 
Nota, Ter Medius est Christus, viz. 1. In S. Trinitate est Media Persona. 2. Inter Deum & Hominem Medians ex par● Officii. 3. Respectu Naturarum, est Medius.   
The Mediator between God and Man, must be both for Nature and Condition a Middle-Person, Ergo, etc.  
3. A third Reason why the Son of God became Man, may be taken from  
The Order of Divine Justice.  
As the Nature of Divine Justice is such, that God cannot salva justitia gratify sin with impunity, or suffer the least guilt to go unpunished, (for that were Partiality) contrary to Socinus his soul-deceiving-fancy) so it requires satisfaction to be made in the same Nature wherein the offence is committed, and accordingly God doth punish sin in the sinner's Nature. True it is, God might have given a Commission to an Angel to assume our Nature; yea, and that Angel might have suffered in our Nature; But an Incarnate Angel could never have satisfied wronged Justice. Therefore the Son of God interposing as Surety and Mediator, between a just God and sinful Mankind, condescended to become Man, that he might answer and satisfy the strictest demands of Impartial Justice in the same Nature that he came to save. Had not Christ been God, his sufferings could never have been by condignity meritoricus; had he not been Man, they could never have been satisfactory to Justice. Therefore he became 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, God-Man.  
4. Lastly,  
The Attributes of God, viz. The Love of God; The Goodness and Mercy of God; His Power; His Wisdom, etc. shine clear in the Incarnation, as in a Glass. Here they concur by way of Eminency, as in the Trinity's Masterpiece (so to speak) and the very Flower of the Evangelical Oeconomy. O how gloriously conspicuous are they here, not only for kind, but even for Degrees! Now one thing that the Son of God designed in taking upon him our Natures, was the Illustration of the Glory of his Attributes. For these Reasons was the Son of God made of a woman.  
If any should inquire, What is the Reason, why the Son of God was made of a woman in the fullness of the time (viz. sixteen hundred and sixty years ago) rather than at any other time sooner, or later; This is answered before.  
Thus I have fully opened and demonstrated that Evangelical Conclusion, viz. That  The Son of God was in the fullness of the time, according to the infallible and determinate counsel of God's will, made of a woman. 
Come we now to the last thing proposed, viz.  
The Application.  
Use 1. Here is matter of Wonder and Admiration, and that fourfold, viz.  
1. An Evangelical Mystery.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, The Incarnation of the Son of God; That 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Great Mystery of Godliness; What? That God should be made of a woman! Is not that a Mystery? That God should become Man! The Immortal God, Mortal! That the Maker of all things should be made! That God should be made what He made!  God sent forth his Son made of a woman. 
Here God was made of her whom He made! Here 
Isa. 9 6.  Mary's Everlasting Father became Mary's Son! These are Riddles to flesh and blood, Beloved!  God sent forth his Son made of a Virgin! 
Here is Miraculum in miraculo, a Mystery in a Mystery; That the Son of God should become the Son of Man! David's Lord, David's Son! This was a great Mystery, a case so intricate, that it plunged and non-plusd the greatest Rabbis among the Pharisees, Matth. 22. 42, 43, 44, 45, 46. But  
That the Son of God should become the Son of a Virgin!— Here is a Mystery in a Mystery. That a Virgin should become a Mother! This was a Thing so Mysterious, that Mary herself, the Royal Mother of our Lord, was a stranger to the manner of the accomplishment of it, How shall this be 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. ? said she to the (Angelical) Angel, Luke 1. 34. So strange, that (as worthy Bishop Usher notes in his Emmanuel) it was proposed as a sign and wonder to Unbelievers, seven hundred and forty years before it was accomplished, Isa. 7. 14. Behold, a Virgin shall conceive, and bear a Son! etc. What? For a Virgin to conceive, and bear! etc. O! What Paradoxes be these? Angel's wonder, Devils tremble at these astonishing Verities. Finally,  
The Personal Union of the Humane and Divine Natures in Christ, is a stupendious Mystery, (that which S. Augustine did so much admire) and a thing which is able to plunge the Celestial Intelligences themselves.)  
There be two great Mysteries, viz.  
1. One Nature in Three Persons.  
2. Two Natures in One Person. And I dare (almost) be bold to say, That  
Three in One in the B. Trinity, is not a greater Mystery, than Two in One in Christ. O! Wonder Christians, wonder at this great Mystery of Godliness! Wonder, That the Word should be made flesh! That the Son of God should be made of a woman! I, of a Virgin! etc. I am persuaded that This is, and will be to all eternity, matter of admiration and wonder in Heaven.  
2. Evangelical Love.  
Here is the most signal Demonstration of the Love of God to Mankind that is possible. What? That the Son of the Living God should be made of a woman! etc.  
This Love may be considered in a twofold respect, viz. As a  

1. Superlative Love, and in its Dimensions.  
2. Soparative and Distinguishing Love.   
1. This Love is superlative, and (for degrees) transcendent.  
Such are the Dimensions of the Love of God, that it is (like God Himself) Incomprehensible; it 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Eph. 3. 19  passeth knowledge: O the height, depth, length, and breadth of this Love! It is the work of Angels and Glorified Saints to admire it. That God should send forth his Son made of a woman, was an unparallelled instance of Love. God SO loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son into the world, etc. John 3. 16. Note that particle (〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉) SO, Thereby is intimated, the very Maximum Quod Sic of Love (and that may be termed without any Derogation from the Deity) the very Maximum Quod Sic of Omnipotency: The highest pitch and Degree of Love, that God could possibly express to Angels or Men. Such was God's Love to Man, that He gave the Son of his Love unto Him; O what a Mirandum of Love did God exhibit in that Deed of Gift! The Result of God's Love to Man was no less than the great Emmanuel 
* Isa. 7. 14. Matth. 1. 23. , God with us! If ever God did (as I may say) excel Himself, it was in this same Love. Herein the B. Trinity is most Eminent.  
Two of God's Holy Attributes were in this Evangelical Oeconomy extended to (a non-ultra) their Outmost, (be it spoken with reverence) viz.  

1. Love.  
2. Wisdom. (Of the latter of which hereafter.)   
A greater Love than that which God did express in the Assumption of Our Nature into Personal Union with the Godhead, is (I dare say, to the praise of rich grace) ultra posse Divinum, an utter Impossibility with God; A thing Impossible to Omnipotency itself; Hoc non potest Omnipotens. There be two great and signal Loves of God to Man, observable from Scripture, viz.  

1. The Love of God, in making Man in his own likeness.  
2. The Love of God in making Himself in Man's likeness.   
God made Man like Himself in the first Man, Adam: God made Himself like Man in the second Adam, Christ. There God was the Pattern, and Man the Pourtaicture; Here Man was the Pattern, and God the Pourtraicture. Now Christians, the latter is the greater Love. In the former God communicates Himself to the Creature But it the latter, God doth by an infinite condescension assume the Creature into Personal Union with the Deity. That God should take upon Him the Humane Nature, intimates greater Love, than that Man should partake of the 
* 2 Pet, 1. 4.  Divine Nature. O Matchless Instance of Affection! Beloved, Heaven itself could not answer the demands of a soul touching a greater Love than this is. 
* Quò Nitè Dei? Quo tua flagravit Charitas? Quo crevit tua Benignitas? etc. Aug. l●b. Med. cap. 7. pag. 698. Tom. 9 Basil. 1569.  Whither? O Son of God Whither flamed thy Charity? Whither increased thy Benignity? Whither reached thy Love? Whither amounted thy Compassion? etc. Here we may say much, and speak but little.  
2. This Love of God is a Distinguishing Love. Signal is that Discrimination, which this Love hath made between Angels and Men, in the favour of Mankind. The Son of God was made of a Woman; so that God became Man; but we do not read that God became an Angel. God took not upon him the Nature of Angels, but he took upon him the Seed of Abraham, Heb. 2. 16. Angels did eminently partake of the Divine Nature, (that is) of God's Communicable Graces and Excellencies) but God did not partake of the Angelical Nature; But  
As God made Man like Himself in the first Creation, so he made Himself like man in the Gospel-work of the Incarnation, etc.  God sent forth his Son made of a woman. 
The Personal Union of the Humane Nature with the Deity, was a Capital and Distinguishing Honour conferred upon Mankind. O highly honoured Man! Angels are not fit Competitors with thee. I challenge the whole * nine 
Angels, Archangels, Virtues, Powers, Principalities, Dominions, Thrones, Cherubims, Seraphims.  Orders of them. What Angel can plead Consanguinity to the Son of God? This Man can do. What Angel can say that of Christ, which Adam said of Eve; 
* Gen. 2. 23.  This is Bone of my bone, and flesh of my flesh? This Man can say. Thy Nature, O Man! is Personally One with the Godhead in Christ; The Angelical Nature is not thus honoured.  
There is a Royal Dignity conferred both upon the Natures and upon the Persons of Men.  
1. Upon their Natures; for  
Our Nature being Personally United to the Deity in Christ, partakes of the Legislative Power of Heaven, and is Entitled to the Crown Royal thereof. The Deity and Humanity of Christ (though distinct Natures, yet) wear not distinct Crowns, but are (as hath been often said) Personally One in King Christ. Now, the Father and the Son divide neither Crowns nor Sceptres, but (jointly) exercise one and the same Jurisdiction. The Man Christ is the King of Angels. O what a Pre-eminence of Nature is that!  
The Humane Nature, is by virtue of its Personal Union with the Godhead, promoted (as I may say) to Regal Authority over the Angels.  
2. Upon their Persons; for  
Men may be said to be of the Blood-Royal of Heaven, and are (so to speak) more nearly related to the Imperial Crown of Heaven, than Angels. Now Beloved, what is this other than the fruit of a Distinguishing Love?  
This Distinguishing Love of God may be further illustrated from this consideration; namely, That Angels are Spiritual; and men, Corporeal Substances; so that there was a greater conformity in Nature between God and Angels, (for both are Spirits) then between God and Men; Now that God should condescend to assume to himself a Body, rather than a Spirit, was merely from the discriminating Love of God. What? And must Day be encircled with the Rays of Divine Majesty? Would not the Angelical Nature have been a more proper Receptacle for the Deity 
Alienum erat a Natura & Divinitate (Dei) sanguinem & carnem suscipere, propter nos autem ea quae sibi erant aliena suscepit,, ut domesticos sibi saceret, qui sueromus alioni per peccatum. Origen. in Esaium, Hom. 7.  than Dust and Ashes, that inferior piece of the Creation?  
Such was the Love of God to Mankind, that he 
* Illos neglexit Illos dilexit.  passed by the fallen Angels, and took upon him the Nature of fallen Man, being made of a woman.  
Hence Angels and not Men are Devils to day; O what an Impression should this make upon us! What? That Man by the Order of Creation, Satan's Inferior, should be honoured with Consanguinity to the Son of God, and near Relation to the B. Irinity! And that Satan once an Angel of Light, should be the first Inhabitant of outer darkness! That the Angels which kept not their first estate, should be left irrecoverably in their lost and accursed estate, and be reserved in everlasting chains under darkness! 
jude 6.  Whereas the Son of God hath graciously condescended to unite to Himself the Nature of fallen Man, that Man might be recovered out of a miserable estate, and restored to a better estate then that from which he had fallen! Is not that a distinguishing Love? Though I could speak with the Tongues of Men and of Angels, yet should I fail in this so amazing an inquisation: This is Soraphical Divinity, Christians! Eternity itself is little enough to admire, and with praise to Comment upon this Theme of God's superlative and distinguishing love to Mankind, in.  
3. Evangelical Humility.  
That the Son of the living God should be made of a woman, was the greatest Instance of Humility that is imaginable, Christ's Humiliation was gradual; there were these two steps in it, viz.  

1. The Assumption of our Nature.  
2. Obedience, Active and Passive in that Nature.   
These were the two gradual parts of the Lord Christ's Self-denial; but the former was the greater of the two.  
That God should become Man, was a greater argument of Self-denial in Christ, than that God-Man should become Obedient (even) unto death; in that there is an infinitely greater distance between God and man (in respect of Being) then there is between Man and death; (for God is of an Infinite Being, and Man (but) of a finite and limited capacity,) whereas (in a sense) it is as Natural for Man to die as to live.  
That He who for Nature was coessential with God, should become coessential with man!  
That He, who for Dignity was coequal with God, should become a 
* Isa. 53. 11. Mat. 12. 28. Phil. 2. 7.  servant.  
That He who for Time and Duration was coeternal with God, should condescend in the fullness of the time to be made of a woman!  
That Christ should be made of Her whose Maker he was! Is not that Humility?  
That the Incomprehensible Majesty of Heaven, * whom 
1 Kings 8. 27.  the Heaven of heavens cannot contain, should stoop to nine month's confinement in the womb of a poor Virgin!  
That the Glory of God should fill a Tabernacle of Clay!  
That * the High and Lofty One should pitch in dust and 
Isa. 57 15.  ashes! That the Sun of Divine Glory should suffer an Eclipse by the Interposition of Earth! O what a stupendious condescension was that! Beloved, Heaven seemed in this to have been wholly devoted to Man. The whole Trinity, (ever admired be Free Grace) seems to have been Self-denied here; The Father was (in a manner) denied to his Dear and only Begotten Son; and the Son to Himself; to his Connatural Glory (which he suffered to be clouded for a time) in condescending to become Man; as he was to life itself, in condescending to die like a Man; though he thought it not robbery to be equal with God, yet he made himself of no reputation (he degraded himself) and took upon him the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness of men, etc. Phil. 2. 6, 7. 
* Quo nate Dei? Quo tua descendit humilitas? etc. Aug. lib. Med. cap. 7. pag. 698. Tom. 9 Basil. 1569.  Whither! O Son of God Whither descended thy Humility? I have been proud, and thou baste been humbled; etc.  
4. Evangelical Wisdom.  
That the Saviour of mankind should be the Son of God, made of a woman, is an Instance of astonishing Wisdom. What?  
1. That God should contrive such a method of salvation, as that he could punish sin, and (yet) spare the sinner! What is that other than the plot of infinite Wisdom? God did punish sin in the Nature of sinners, and (yet) did spare the persons of sinners; Justice received satisfaction in our Nature, and (yet) Mercy was glorified in the salvation of our Nature; and (which is a glorious soul-refreshing truth) the same Justice which obliged God to punish sin in our Nature, doth now oblige him to pardon sin in our Persons.  
2. That God should at once glorify both Justice and Mercy in a Saviour, is the memorable product of Divine Wisdom. Those two Attributes, viz. Justice and Mercy, are both at once glorified in Christ; Justice, In that God did indispensably require satisfaction in order to the sinner's salvation; Mercy, In that God did from an impulse of free Love to sinners, provide a Surety and Mediator in order to satisfaction; God satisfied Himself in Himself: So that here is a sweet Attemperation (so to speak) of Justice and Mercy. Those two Attributes (however they may seem to represent God with a contrary Aspect, yet) are (as it were) reconciled in Christ; Here Mercy is acted in the severest piece of Justice; never was there a more severe Act of Justice, then that God's own Son should become a sacrifice, rather than Justice should not be satisfied. Again, Never was there a more signal Act of Mercy, then that God's own Son should become a sacrifice, rather than Mercy should not be glorified. O the Wonder-working Wisdom of God  
Had God called a General Assembly of the Peers of Heaven, those Celestial Intelligences, they could never have devised such a method of salvation for poor sinners, as God hath in love to their souls, contrived in his own Son, made of a woman; O the depth of the Riches both of the wisdom and knowledge of God  
Thus I have endeavoured to display matter of Wonder and thankful Admiration. Beloved, these are things which the very glorious Angels desire to look (and pry) into. 
* 1 Pet. 1. 12. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  Angelical Speculations! And I dare say, that it will be a great part of the work of Angels and Saints in glory, to celebrate those Mirabilia Dei, and Evangelical wonders, with praises, to all eternity.  
Use 2 2. Here is ground of Reprehension.  
Was the Son of God in the fullness of the time made of a woman? This may serve sharply to reprove two sorts of persons.  

1. The Jew.  
2. The Judaizing Christian.   
1. The Jew.  
Although it is palpably manifest, and clear (as the light) from the infallible Oracle of Gospel, the visible accomplishment of Prophetical Predictions, etc. That the Son of God is already (long ago) come in the flesh; that the Messiah, the promised Seed of the woman, is come; yet Jew's (poor wretches!) will not believe it. To this day do they continue in obstinate incredulity, and a vain expectation of the Messiah their King; and so (alas! alas!) through a vain expectation of the Saviour, they miss of a Saviour. That which my soul most pities them for, is, That during these sixteen hundred years darkness and desertion, hundreds of thousands of them (yea, for aught I know) as many hundred thousands as there are centuries of years, have died irrecoverably in their sins! (But just is God in all his ways) And if God in mercy to their souls, hasten not their Conversion, and the re-ingrafting of those * Native Branches into the common Root, 
Rom. 11. 21. 24.  (Christ;) how many thousands more may yet perish, the Lord knows! For (oh Lord!) they die daily! Ah! Thus it fares with them, who (once) were God's peculiar people! his Portion! the dearly Beloved of his soul!  

Poor Nation! Whose sweet sap and juice,  
Our Cyens have purloined, and left you dry:  
Whose streams we got by the Apostles sluice;  
And use in Baptism, while ye pine and die:  
Who by not keeping once, became a Debtor;  
And now by keeping lose the Letter.   

O that my prayers! mine, alas!  
O that some Angel might a Trumpet sound;  
At which the Church falling upon her face,  
Should cry so loud, until the Trump were drowned,  
And by that cry, of her dear Lord obtain  
That your sweet sap might come again!   
The Metrical Apostrophe of a 
* Mr. George Herbert of Cambridge, in his Sacred Poems.  holy Poet to that Nation  
It is observable of that people, that by adhering to the Law, they lose the Gospel; by cleaving to Moses, the Typical Messiah, they miss of the Messiah, the true Moses. Were I able by my voice to reach the land of Jewry, or the dispersed Jews wherever they are scattered as forlorn Vagabonds, to day, I would a little expostulate with them. Oh, obstinate and incredulous Jews! Are ye in Covenant with perdition? Are ye resolved to perish in Unbelief? But, will ye not admit of Gospel (which presents us with this great Evangelical truth, viz. That in the fullness of the time, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman? the only true Messiah) What? Are ye in league with Moses? In love with servitude and bondage? The Prophecies concerning the Messiah are fulfilled; yea (as I have showed above) the Messiah his own Prophecies and Personal Predictions are fulfilled: O that ye would learn the belief of the Truth, from the very Prophesied Ruins of your Temple, City, Laws, whole State, Policy, and Commonwealth! Ah! poor Jew! The Lord convince you, that there is no possibility of Life for you, but in him who died by you! Ye cannot be saved but through him, whom by wicked hands ye have crucified and slain: The only (possible) way and method of salvation, is that very blood which (you are guilty of, and) hath these sixteen hundred years lain upon your heads through your crucifying of the Lord of glory; and that direful Imprecation, His blood be upon us and our children, wherein the Curse of that execrable sin of bloodshed is entailed upon your Posterity! And, O how sad is it, when Persons are guilty of that very blood which alone is effectual for the pardon of guilt! for peace with God for the salvation of precious souls! etc.  
2. The Judaizing Christian.  
By Judaizing Christians, I understand those that contend for Ceremonies in point of Worship, in a professed Christian Church: For a Ceremonial kind of Worship being peculiar to the Jewish Church, (as wholly Typical,) it followeth by necessary Consequence, That an Introduction of Ceremonies in point of Worship (into the Christ an Church) is a Reduction of Judaisme. Now such are liable to a just Reproof from hence, namely, That the Son of God was in the fullness of the time made of a woman. (Where Adulterate Rome, with her Jewish-Popish Trumpery, falls shrewdly under the lash, (only what pity is it that so strong a weapon is in so weak a hand?) For the Jewish Rites and Ceremonies being but Shadows and Typical Adumbrations of the promised Messiah, must needs be abrogated now, since the Messiah, the Body and Substance prefigured by them, is come: When the Body is come, the Shadow evanisheth; Types cease in the Anti-type. So that to retain Jewish Ceremonies in the Christian Church, were Antichristian Judaisme; for that were (virtually) to deny that the Son of God is come in the flesh.  
I lay down no other (as to the sense) than what a great 
D. Downam, in his Treatise of Christian Liberty.  * Doctor of the Formalists hath asserted before me. The Ceremonial Rites (saith he, they are his own words) because they were principally ordained to prefigure Christ, are so abolished, that it is not lawful for Christians to observe them; for that were to deny that Christ is come. (I confess I am of his judgement) and he citys S. Augustine, 
* Contra Faustum Manich. lib. 19 cap. 18.  Ea non observant Christiani, per quae Christus promittebatur, nec adhuc promittuntur, quia jam impleta sunt. Christians observe not those things by which Christ was promised; neither are they as yet promised, because they are already fulfilled.  
For my own part (its true, I am less than the least of ten thousand, and therefore no wonder that men in this Learned Age overlook me, as little objects which escape the sense, however) it is a conclusion with me, that Ceremonies in point of Worship, are altogether unlawful in Gospel-times; since Christ, who was typified by them, is come; (for when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman:) as (blessed be God) we read, preach, hear, and believe to day. I do not now plead either Conscience or Covenant that forbidden Argument; But My ground is Scripture-Evidence. For,  
Was not this God's great design in sending forth his Son made of a woman, namely, That he might redeem them that were under the Law? The Jewish Church was subject to the Ceremonial and Judicial Laws of Moses. As 1. A Yoke in respect of her servile-state. And 2. A Schoolmaster, and Rudiments, in respect of her Infant-state; (and hence the Apostle calls them, The * Elements of the 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  world, v. 3.) But the Son of God did in the fullness of the time, (when the Church was grown up to maturity and an adult age) take upon him our Nature, and was made under the Law, that he might redeem his Church from that bondage and subjection. Exemption from Legal Rites and Ceremonies, whether we consider them 1. As a pedagogy; Or 2. As a Yoke, being that part of Christ's purchase which is peculiar to the Christian Church. And  
What other is the drift of the blessed Apostle in the Context, then to prove the same?— When we were children (saith he) that is, the Church in her Infant-state and minority,) we were in bondage under the elements of the world) that is, a Mosaical pedagogy of Puerile Ceremonies and Rituals) v. 3. But when the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, etc. And hence it is that he so roundly checks the Galatians (a Judaizing people in many things, as appears) v. 9, 10, 11. But now (saith he) after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, How turn ye again to the 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  weak and beggarly Elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage? Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years; I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain. What? (would be say) Are ye in love with your Bonds? Will ye return to your first Rudiments and A B C? A notable Sarcasme! And hence is that Cautelary Advice of the Apostle to the Colossians, chap. 2. v. 17, 18. Let no man judge (or condemn) you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, or of the new Moon, or of the Sabbath days, which are a shadow of the things to come, but the Body is of Christ. Legal Observances, and Festival Times were mere shadows of Christ to come. He is the Body that was prefigured by them. Now this Body being come, to what purpose are shadows? Oh! that men should contend so eagerly for shadows!  
Once more,  
Carnal Ordinances, Rites, and Ceremonies, were imposed upon the Jews. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, until the time of Reformation, Heb. 9 9, 10. (O what pity is it that they should be pursued by professed Christians instead of a Reformation!) Now the time of Reformation, was the time of the Churches Emancipation and deliverance from these carnal Ordinances, Rites, and Ceremonies by her Redeemer, the Son of God, made of a woman. In a word, Ceremonial Worship in a Christian Church, seems (to me) to be contrary to God's design in coming in the flesh, not to say, to the design of Gospel.  
But let us examine what the Ceremonialists say for themselves.  
Ceremonies (say they) be of two sorts, viz.  

1. Typical.  
2. Symbolical.   
1. Typical Ceremonies (say they) being ordained to presigure Christ, the promised Messiah, are by him abolished, and (by consequence) unlawful in the New Testament times; But  
2. Symbolical and Mystically-significant Ceremonies may very lawfully be continued in the Christian Church, as useful for edification (besides Order and Decency;) (by 
Dr Burgess of the lawfulness of kneeling. etc. cap. 17. pag. 52.  virtue of some spiritual signification, which they attribute to them, calling them sacred signs of spiritual Mysteries.) Thus the Surplice (for instance) being (say they) a Symbolical Ceremony, as that which signifies the Minister's pureness and Innocency, may be lawfully (yea profitably) used (even) by the Christian Clergy.  
Answ. It is not my purpose to debate the lawfulness of those Mystical-significant Ceremonies. I leave that to be learned of those, of whom I may learn. The Learned Author of the Dispute against the English-Popish Ceremonies, hath by divers arguments disproved it, etc. Only,  
I shall presume to speak my own thoughts (having respect to the Text) in a few particulars, which I am humbly bold to offer to the Ceremony-mongers for satisfaction.  
1. If Types and Legal shadows be abolished by Christ, (the true Messiah) who was (as hath been often said) prefigured by the same, and therefore is called 
* John 1. 17.  The Truth in answer to Types; and 
* Col. 2. 17, 18. Praesente viritate Typus & Vmbra cessavit, Origen in Jes. Nave. cap 13. Hom. 17.  The Body in answer to shadows, which they do and must acknowledge; Then I desire for Conscience sake to be resolved, in order to three things, namely, what ground there is for  

1. The Introduction of Altars.  
2. The nice observance of Holidays, (I approve of a holy observance of days.)  
3. Organical Music in the Gospel Church?   
1. As touching Altar.  
Who knows not that the Altar (both That of Incense, Exod. 30. and That of Burnt-offering, Exod. 27.) was an eminent Type of Christ? I dare say there was not a more 
Altar suit prius, & sacrificia celebrabantur, sed ut venit verus Agnus, qui seipsum Hostiam obtulit Deo, cuncta illa velut pro tempore posita cessaverunt. Origen. in Levit. cap. 16. Hom. 10. Cum in adventu Salvatoris nostri Dei è Coelis descendens veritas, de terra orta est, Vmbra & exemplaria ceciderunt. Cecidit enim Jerusalem, cecidit Templum, Altar sublatum est, etc. Id. in Jos. Nave. cap. 13. Hom. 17.  memorable Type under the Law, than the Altar was. Now then, if Types be abolished by Christ, why not Altars? Under the Old Testament (saith 
* Hospin. de Templis, de orig. Altarium.  Hospinian) there were two Altars, and both did prefigure Christ; but because all Types and shadows are past and evanished, Nulla Altaria deinceps in Ecclesia, excitari sen erigi debebant; It is unlawful afterwards to erect Altars in the Church; and he quotes the Prophet Isaiah, prophesying of the Kingdom of Christ, chap. 17. v. 7. At that day shall a man look to his Maker, and his eyes shall have respect to the holy One of Israel; and he shall not look to the Altars, the work of his hands, neither shall respect that which his fingers have made, etc.  
2. As touching Festival days.  
Those also were under the Law Figurative and Pedagogical, as is clear from the letter; Let no man (saith our Apostle) judge you in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, which are a Shadow of things to come, but the Body is of Christ, Col. 2. 17, 18. Those were Legal shadows and adumbrations of Christ, the Body; therefore they are abrogated. Quis nesciat, ubi jam est corpus ibi umbram desinere, saith Zanchy upon the place; Who knows not that shadows cease and vanish when the Body is come? But  
It is objected, That Jewish Festivities only are abolished, because those were Typical; but Christian Festivities are warrantable, etc.  
Answ. It is well observed by 
* Hospin. Do Fest. Christ. cap. 2.  Hospinian, That Christianorum festa ab hominibus tantum, Judaeorum vero, a Deo fuerunt instituta. Christian Festivals were ordained by Men only, but the Judaical by God himself. Now if those of God's own Institution which he ordained for his own honour be abolished by Himself. 1. How presumptuous is the Papist which dares to press the observation of feasts of their own devising, and that for the honour of Men like themselves? Nay 2. It seems not a little strange to me, That when God hath abolished what he himself did institute, Men should presume to re-institute the same. God is willing that Festivals should vanish as mere shadows; and is Man unwilling? But The Papist loves to supererogate.  
It is replied,  
They do not observe their Festivities after the manner that the Jews did, to whom they were Pedagogical, and mere Figures.  
Answ. It is remarkable that the Apostle doth sharply check the Galatians for observing of days, and months, and times, and years, Gal. 4. 10. Now, who doth doubt but that the Galatians (before whose eyes Jesus Christ was 
Gal, 3. 1. See Cartwright against the Rhemist, on Gal. 4. 10.  evidently set forth) did believe that the Son of God was come in the flesh? So that we cannot imagine them to have observed those days, months, years, the Anniversary Solemnities, and other Festival Times, as Figures and Adumbrations of Christ to come; but rather, as Memorials and Commemorative signs that he was already come, and yet behold here they are taxed as culpable! Ergo etc.  
3. As touching Organical Music in the Worship of God.  
That was also Pedagogical and Figurative; and therefore peculiar to the Jewish Church: What ground is there then for the retention of it in the Christian and Gospel-Church? Since (as is granted even by those that are sticklers for it) all Types and Figures are abolished.  
Two things are incumbent upon me here, viz.  

1. To evidence that Organs in the Worship of God were Types.  
2. To instance in the Anti-type, or the thing (particularly) typified thereby.   
As touching the former.  
That Organs in the Worship of God in the Old Testament times, were Types, Figures, and merely Jewish, may appear from the impregnable testimonies of Classical Authors, (whom I have consulted in the thing.)  
1. Justin Martyr that ancient Father (who lived in 
Justin Martyr Quaest. 107.  the second Age and Century of the Christian Church,) saith, That the Primitive Christian Church did explode that Pedagogical Custom of Organical Music in the worship of God, as rather beseeming 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Children, and the Infant-State of the Church, than the Gospel-Church; and retained Vocal singing.  
2. * chrysostom (who lived about two hundred years 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. in Psal. 150.  after him) saith, That Organs in Divine worship were permitted to the Jews because of their weakness; and he makes a moral Application of it to us under the Gospel. As (saith he) the Jews praised God with all Instruments of Music, so Christians are commanded to praise him with all the members of their Bodies; Eyes, Ears, Tongue, Hands, etc. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. They are his own words on Psal. 150.) then Man himself becomes (as it were) a manifold Harp to God.  
3. Isidorus Peleusiotus his Disciple, asserts the very 
* Isidor. Pelous. lib. 1. Epist. 457. lib. 2. Epist. 176.  same thing, and puts the Jewish Music (in Divine worship) into the same rank with the Jewish Sacrifices, which who can deny to have been Typical? Since (saith he) the Lord permitted to the Jews their bloody Sacrifices because of the Infancy and Puerile state of that Church; 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Why shouldest thou wonder that he permitted to them also the Harp and Psaltery?  
4. S. 
* Nemo se convertat ad Organa Theatrica quod ei jubetur in se habet; sicut alibi dicitur. In me Deus vota tua, etc. Aug. in Psal. 32. Conc. 1.  Augustine's testimony is very remarkable, Let no man (saith he) betake himself to Theatrical Organs, (to wit, in the worship of God) thou hast within thyself (O man) what God requireth of thee; according to that which elsewhere is said, Thy vows are upon me, O God, I will render praises unto thee, Psal. 56. 12.  
But further,  
5. 
* Aquin. 2. 2 de Quaest. 91. Art. 2.  Aquinas asserts the very same thing, Instrumenta Musica, sicut Citharas & Psalteria, non assumit Ecclesia in Divinas laudes, ne videatur Judaizare. The Christian Church makes not use of Musical Instruments, as the Harp or Psaltery, in the celebration of Divine praises, lest she should seem to Judaize. And again saith he, In veteri Testamento usus erat talium instrumentorum, tum quia, populus erat magis durus & carnalis, etc. Tum quia hujusmodi instrumenta corporalia aliquid figurabant. The Old Testament Church made use of such Musical Instruments, both because she was more obdured and carnal, etc. and also because those Instruments did typify and prefigure somewhat. Mark that. Hence Cardinal Cajetan commenting upon that Article, observes, That the Church did not use Organical Music in the days of Aquinas.  
* Hospinian, after that he hath cited divers Authors, 
Hosp. de Templis, de Orig. Organ.  and noted many things concerning the first use and introduction of an Organ into the Christian Church, hath these words; Colligimus ex his Organorum hujusmodi usum, veteri & Apostolicae Ecclesiae prorsus incognitum seroque inventum & receptum fuisse. We gather (saith he) from those, that the use of Organs was altogether unknown to the Ancient Apostolic Church; and that they are but lately invented and received into the Church; and he brings in Cardinal Cajetan confessing the same thing, and withal adding, That for confirmation thereof, the Romish Church useth no Organs before the Pope; and 
* Suarez Tom. 2. de Vi●t. & Stat. Relig. lib. 4. cap. 8. num. 5.  Suarez that Jesuitical Champion gives the reason of it: Musical Instruments are not used in the Pope's Chapel, because (saith he) the use of them, non tani gravis judicatur, is not judged to savour of gravity enough. Ah! That British Cathedrals should come short of Popish Chapels in point of gravity!  
(The same Suarez speaks of a Pope that did by Edict 
* Suarez ib. viz. Tom. 2. de Verit. & Stat. Rel. lib. 4. cap. 8. num. 1.  so bid Organical Music in the Worship of God, and he brings in Navarrus affirming the unlawfulness of using Organs at Mass, or other Divine service, by virtue of that Prohibition.  

* Baron. Anal. Eccles. ann. Christ. 60. pag. 578.  Caesar Baronius that great Popish Annalist affirms the same thing that Hospinian upon the matter, Sane quidem Musica Instrumenta, haud antiquitus in Ecclesiam introducta & recepta esse videntur, saith he, Musical Instruments seem not to have been received into the Church in the Primitive times. And he quotes Justin Martyr asserting 
Justin. q. 107.  the same thing. Nay,  

* Bellarm. lib. 1. de bonis oper. cap. 17.  Bellarmine himself, that great light of the Romish Firmament, confesseth that Organical Music, was at first introduced into the Christian Church in the days of 
* So saith Balaeus an English Bishop according to Hospinian de Tem. de orig. Organ.  Pope Vitalian, Ann. Christ. 660. according to Platina. Or (saith he) if we will credit Almoinus, (lib. 4. de gestis Francorum, cap. 114.) not until the days of Lodovicus Pius, 820. years after our Lord's Incarnation, and that by the industry of one Georgius Venetus a Priest, (as I find in H●●●nian de Templis, de origine Organorum; where he ●●●teth Aventinus, affirming the same thing (lib. 4.) t●●t Almoinus.  
Thus I have made a Collection of Testimonies (having perused my Authors severally.) From which it is evident, that Organical Music in the Worship of God, was under the Law a part of the Jewish pedagogy, and figurative, and (by consequence) Peculiar to the Jewish Church.  
I might have argued from the Authentic Example of Christ and his Apostles, whom we find singing Hymns and Psalms; Christ and his Disciples sung an Hymn, Matth. 26. 30. They had not an Organ there, at least we read of none. Paul and Silas sung praises unto God, Acts 16. 25. Vocal praise is the Gospel praise. This Christ commends to the Apostles, and they to their Christian Flocks and Churches (respectively) as Eph. 5. 18, 19 Col. 3. 16. James 5. 13. But let our Musical Zelots instance, when and where Christ or his Apostles did either command or commend Organical Music to the Gospel-Church if they can. But  
I was willing to trace them in their own Element, for, they are professed Antiquaries, and many of them (I doubt) 
Vid. Aug. Confess. lib. 10. cap. 33. Lactant. lib. 2. cap. 4. Hierom. in Eph. 5. Hospin. de Temp. de orig. Organ. Erasm. in 1 Cor. 14, Zepper. de Polit. Eccles. lib. 1. cap. 13. Muscul. Epist. Dedicat. ante Comment. in Psalmos, etc.  more ready to interpret Orthodoxy by the Fathers then by the SON. If notwithstanding those pregnant testimonies, men remain obstinate, I can but turn them over to the lash of the more sober sort of Papists, as Erasmus, Cajetan, etc. who have both lamented and sharply inveighed against the sad (and too too frequent) profanation of Divine Worship, by their Organical and Theatrical Music; (quae carnis potius voluptati, quam Spiritus aedificationi inservit. Lactanct. lib. 2. cap. 24.  
As touching the latter.  
The Anti-type. That which was prefigured by Organical Music in the Old-Testament Church.  
Were I worthy to speak my own thoughts in the thing, I would say, That  
Legal Adumbrations and Types might be conceived to have had a threefold reference, viz. to  

1. Christ Personal.  
2. Christ Mystical.  
3. The Glory of Gospel-Ministery.   
1. As they did respect Christ Personal, they had a more especial reference, either to his Incarnation, or to his Offices, or to his Death, etc. and accordingly were abrogated as to their Typical signification.  
2. As they did respect Christ Mystical, that is, the Church (consisting of her Head and Members mystically united) they were (according to the successive promulgation of the Gospel, and Plantation of the Christian Church) gradually abolished, (even) as to their continuance and observation. And hence S. Paul did at the beginning, and (as it were) the first dawning of Gospel, in the Gentiles Hemisphere, Circumcise Timothy (though by his Father's side a Greek) because of the Infirmity of the Jews, Acts 16. 3. But afterwards when the Gospel was more generally published, and the Christian Church more ripened, he would not Circumcise Titus, Gal. 2. 3. Now  
3. Organs, and other Musical Instruments (we may include the silver Trumpets, Numb. 10.) in the Jewish Church, may (as I humbly conceive) be said to have prefigured the Glory of Gospel Ministry. That Organical Music was under the Old Testament Figurative and Typical, is I presume (now) apparent; and why it may not be said to typify the Glory of Evangelical Administration, I cannot learn.  
Why may not Organs, etc. be said to have prefigured the same thing that the Silver Trumpets did? But the Silver Trumpets did (if we credit the 
* Significant praedicationem Evangelicam toto Orbe resonantem. Cornel. a lap. in Num. 10. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Cyrill. in Exod. lib. 3. pag. 323. vid. pag. 322.  Learned) prefigure Evangelical Preaching and Ministry. Ergo etc.  
And  
What could be more properly typified by the Musical sound in the Jewish Church, than the 
* Psal. 89. 15.  joyful sound in the Christian Church, even the glorious sound of the Everlasting Gospel? etc.  
Thus I have endeavoured to show, both 1. That Organical Music under the Old Testament was a Type. And 2. What was the Anti-type; Now, since it was Typical, why is it introduced into the Gospel-Church?  
Possibly it will be said that an Altar, Organ, Candlesticks, etc. are retained in the Christian, (though they were Typical in the Jewish) Church, but not as Typical. And then 1. What Type was there under the Law, which may not (as well as those) be received into the Gospel-Church, so it be not received as a Type? Why not a Tabernacle as well as an Altar? (For my part, I would fain learn, what reason there is for the one more than for the other.) Why not a Brazen Serpent? etc. Again, 2. They must be at the expense of coining a new distinction, (for that of Typical and Symbolical Ceremonies will not bear them out) which we have not heard of as yet.  
This is my first answer.  
2. Membra coincidunt.  
The Members of that distinction of Ceremonies, Typical and Symbolical, are co-incident. Even those Ceremonies which are said to be (and retained as) Symbolical, were under the Law Typical. Now this is contrary to the Rules of a right Division.  
To instance. The Surplice and other Vestments are retained as Symbolical and significant Ceremonies; for a Mystical signification is attributed to them; the Surplice being a sign (as is said) of the Minister's Purity, etc. Now the Priestly and Levitical Garments, to which these answer, were all Typical. Multiplex illa Vestium Sacerdotalium distinctio & varietas, erat in Veteri Testamento Typica; Veritate autem exhibita quid amplius Typos requirunt? saith 
* Syntag. Theolog. lib. 9 cap. 38.  Amandus Polanus. The distinction of Priestly Vestments under the Law was Typical, but the Truth and Anti-type being exhibited, why do men contend for Types any longer?  
Christ's threefold Office was shadowed by the High Priest's Apparel; (as is observed by Polanus, and others) viz. His Kingly Office, by the Mitre which the High Priest did wear upon his Head: His Priestly Office by the Plate of pure Gold, whereon was engraven Holiness to the Lord; and the Ephod and Breastplate whereon were engraven the Names of the twelve Tribes. His Prophetical Office by the Vrim and Thummim in the Breastplate, from which he answered as from an Oracle, as also by the Bells and Pomegranates; the one typing the sound of his Doctrine; the other the sweet savour of his Life. As for the four extraordinary Garments which the High Priest wore only once a year, to wit, when he entered into the Holy of Holies upon the Propitiation day, which were for colour white, (and therefore called Vestimenta alba, 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉  white Garments) and for number four, viz. 1. The linen Breeches. 2. The linen Coat. 3. The linen Girdle. 4. The linen Mitre, Leu. 16. 4. These (give me leave to say it) were not so much signs of Aaron's; as Levitical Shadows and Types of the Lord Christ (that immaculate Lamb of God, the Holy and Just One) his Purity and Innocency, the holiness of his Person, and the Inculpableness of his Life; He was our holy, harmless, and undefiled High Priest, Heb. 7. 26.  
Amandus' Polanus indeed saith, that S. Paul in describing and prescribing the Christians Panoplia and complete Armour, Ephes. 6. doth allude to the Sacerdotal Vestments under the Law, viz. the Mitre, Breastplate, Girdle, etc. But if the Christian Clergymen ground the Mystical significancy of Vestments upon this, I know no reason why the Laity, and every Private Christian may not challenge as good a right to the use of Mitre, Girdle, Surplice, etc. as they, since it is incumbent upon every Christian to put on the whole armour of God, etc.  
From what hath been said it may appear, that the Priestly Vestments under the Law, were Levitical shadows, and Typical; and yet those under the Gospel are said to be Symbolical only, and Mystically significant; then the same Ceremonies are both Typical and Symbolical: Now if they were Typical, why are they not abolished? If they were Symbolical according to our Bishops (else why are they retained in the Gospel-Church?) and (yet) Typical according to Polanus, and (as it is evident) then 'tis needful that they study another distinction then that of Typical and Symbolical Ceremonies; saying, that Typical Ceremonies are all abolished, but Symbolical Ceremonies may be retained in the Gospel-Church.  
In conclusion,  
I desire to be resolved, what is the Mystical signification of a Mitre in a Christian Bishop? Not Dominion (I 
1 Pet. 5. 3.  hope) over God's heritage? O! Leave that to the Antichristian Bishop of Rome, who is taught of his Father the 
John 8. 44.  Devil to usurp power over God's Inheritance, and to Lord it (as much as he can) over Consciences, yea, over Crowns too, (but surely it was not so from the beginning, that the Crown should be subject to the Mitre). Now  
The High Priest's Mitre, was (as I have showed above) a Type of Christ's Regal Authority and Kingly Office.  
This is my second answer to that distinction of Typical and Symbolical Ceremonies; more I might say, but I forbear.  
Only give me leave to add, That a Ceremonial Worship is abolished, not only Christi CORPORE, but even Christi ORE; not only by the Body, but even by the Doctrine of Christ, and his Personal teaching in the days of his flesh; The hour cometh (said he to the woman of Samaria) and now is, when the true Worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth, John 4. 23. By worshipping the Father in spirit and in truth, we are to understand a Now and Evangelical manner of Worship.  
Here then is principally intimated; Not  
1. The Indispensable Need of the Concurrence of God's Spirit with a soul in Divine Worship. Nor  
2. Sincerity, or the Absolute necessity of joining the Inner with the Outward Man, the Soul with the Body in Divine Worship; for, did not the Religious and Devout Jews, (yea, and for aught I know, many Samaritans) worship God thus, viz. by the special assistance of God's Spirit, and by a sincere joining of the Soul with the Body in his Worship, before? (it were an uncharitable part for me, or others to think otherwise) Now Christ doth here mean some New manner of Worship, by worshipping the Father in spirit and in truth; Woman (saith he) believe me, the hour cometh, when ye shall neither in this Mountain, nor yet at Jerusalem worship the Father, v. 21. But etc. v. 23.  
That than which is chief intended here, is,  
3. The Utter Abrogation of the Old Carnal and Ceremonial Worship, as a thing merely Typical (worshipping in Spirit, being opposed thereunto, as Carnal; worshipping in truth being opposed thereunto, as Typical) and the substitution of a New, and Evangelical Worship, free from Jewish Ceremonies.  
It is probable that the Ceremonians will say,  
Though we make use of Ceremonies in Divine Worship, yet ours is not a Ceremonial worship; for we place not worship in the Ceremonies.  
Answ. 1. Holiness is placed in the Ceremonies, Ergo Worship. 
* lib. 5 s. 69.  Hooker in his Ecclesiastical Policy, saith expressly, that some days ought to be with men more holy than others; Contrary to 
* de Fest. Christ cap. 2.  Hospinian, who affirmeth that one day is not holier than another, in itself, else (saith he) the Heathens are not to be blamed, who, attributing events to inevitable fate, distinguish of lucky and unlucky days. But what shall I say? Are not men's adulterate practices shrewd symptoms thereof? as, Their Incurvations and cringings before an Altar of stone; a nice and superstitious regard to a table of wood, which they enclose as if it were a second Holy of Holies; their devout respect to a material structure and fabric, (which (yet) possibly in the days of old, was a Receptacle of Idolatry, yea and devoted thereunto); their declared singularity (not to say sanctity) of Vestments,  Procul O procul este prophani— 
and such like; Are not (these I say) shrewd symptoms of the truth of what I say? But  
2. Ceremonies are pursued as things necessary to Divine Worship; Ergo etc. Possibly they will not say that Ceremonies are Essential parts of the Worship of God, (though as I shall presently show, some have even gone this length) yet I appeal to themselves, whether they ground not a Necessity (yea an indispensable one) at least, on the Mystical significancy, or pretended, teaching virtue (They are resolved to teach, if not Ore, yet more. Ah! dumb Teachers!) or pleaded order and decency of Ceremonies, (though it were an easy matter to disprove, as the necessity, so the expediency, yea, the pretended lawfulness and indifferency of them.) Now, Quaecunque observatio quaesi necessaria commendatur, continuo censetur ad cultum Dei pertinere, saith 
* De vera Eccles. resorm. p. 367.  Calvin.  
Nay,  
3. 
* Dr. Burgess of the Lawfulness of kneeling, etc. cap. 3. See D. Burgess cap. 15. p, 41, 42.  A great Formalist saith, That Ceremonies may be called Worship of God, not only ratione modi, but even ratione medii; not only as additional things belonging to the reverend use of God's prescribed Worship; but also as a mean, though not by virtue of any thing in itself, but by virtue of somewhat else. If so, with what face can they blame Papists, who place worship (indeed) in their Cross & Crucifix, but not by virtue of any thing in itself, but in respect of Christ crucified, whom (say they) it represents? Once more,  
4. A thing pertains to the Worship of God, say the 
* Ad cultum Dei pertinet aliquid dupliciter, uno modo, cum cum aliquid Deo offertur; alio modo, cum aliquid Divinum assumitur. Aquin. 2. 2. Quaest. 95. Art. 2.  Schoolmen, two manner of ways; viz. vel quoad oblationem, vel quoad assumptionem; either when we offer to God any thing in point of Worship, or when we add and receive any thing into his Worship: Hence they are guilty of a superstitious and Ceremonial Worship, not only who offer to God for Worship, but also who assume in God's worship as sacred, what God himself hath not ordained. Such are Jewish-Popish Ceremonies, Ergo etc.  
Thus I have pursued at large the Use of Reprehension, having respect to my Text: O that the Lord would second it with the powerful convictions of his Spirit!  
Use 3 Here is matter of Consolation.  
Beloved; Here is a Summary of Evangelical Comfort, here is the choicest thing that is displayed in Gospel. What? A Redeemer for undone Mankind! A Saviour for sinners! And that one of their own flesh and blood too! viz. The Son of God made of a woman. Here is Semen Mulicris, the * Seed of the Woman, which was five thousand 
Gen. 3. 15.  years ago promised and preached, by God Himself, the first Evangelist, and Preacher of Christ and Gospel; I will put enmity (said he) between thee and the woman, and between thy seed, and her seed; and IT shall bruise thy head, etc. This was the first Gospel that ever was preached. The second Evangelist was an Angel, who made a comfortable Sermon upon the same Text: Fear not (said he to the Shepherds) for behold, I bring you good tidings of great joy; for unto you is born this day, in the City of David, a SAVIOUR, etc. Luke 2. 10, 11. This Angelical was a truly Evangelical Sermon. It is well worthy of our observation, that an Angel was employed in the first publication of the Nativity of our Lord; and Gospel-comfort redounding from thence to sinful, undone, Man. But I would not, I must not be too prolix here. The comfort that doth accrue to poor, broken, captive sinners, from God-Incarnate, may appear from an inspection into the capital benefits, mentioned v. 5. viz.  

1. Redemption.  
2. Adoption.   
God's great design in assuming to himself our Nature, was (saith our Apostle) That he might 1. Redeem them that were under the Law. 2. That we might receive the Adoption of Sons.  
These be privileges of the first magnitude, and they are gradual. In the one we are exempted from a Servile; In the other we are dignified with a Filial condition: By the one, we cease to be Slaves; by the other, we become Sons. I shall (through mercy) speak to both; (but to the latter more briefly) for displaying to the Saints Gospel-comfort; which divides itself here (as it were) into two streams or channels.  
Of Christian Liberty.  
1. The first is Redemption.  
This is a Believers Christian Liberty, (that great Evangelical Privilege) wherein he is freed from his Native Bondage and Captivity, intimated while he is said to be under the Law. Now  
Christian Liberty considered in its full Extent and Latitude hath in it these eight steps.  
1. The first is, Exemption from the Curse and Condemning power of the Moral Law.  
There is a twofold Power in the Law. viz.  

1. Mandatory.  
2. Damnatory.   
A Commanding and a Condemning Power.  
And accordingly the Legal Obligation is twofold, viz.  

1. Active.  
2. Penal.   
That is an Obligation to Duty; This is an Obligation to a Penalty.  
1. The Mandatory and Directive Power of the Law is ever in force; for the Law is a standing and Irreversible Rule of Life and Obedience. But  
2. The Damnatory and Maledictive Power of the Law (by virtue whereof sinful Delinquents are bound over to death; to a curse and condign punishment; (on the day thou eatest thereof, thou shalt surely die, said God to Adam concerning the Probational Tree of the Knowledge of good and evil, Gen. 2. 17.) is fully answered and disannulled for Believers, by Christ; for he hath redeemed us from the curse of the Law, being made a curse for us, Gal. 3. 13. Christ hath redeemed the Saints from the curse, though not from the command of the Law. And in this sense it is said, that the Law is not made for a righteous person, 1 Tim. 1. 9 which therefore we must not understand in the Antinomians and lose Libertines sense, as if the Law were not at all Obligatory to a righteous person, binding him to holiness and obedience; O no! The Law is ever recti-dica, but never maledica to Believers. In a word;  
Believers are by Christ exempted from the Penal curse, malediction, and condemnatory sentence of the Law. So that  
Though (temporal) death is inevitably common both to the Redeemed, and to Reprobates; for it is (by an old infallible Statute) appointed unto (all) men once to die, Heb. 9 27. yet the Redeemed of the Lord are not liable to death (nor indeed to any affliction whatsoever) by virtue of any maledictive influence of the Law upon them. Mors illis nec abest, nec obest: though death is inevitable, yet it is not hurtful. Death is necessary in the Saints, not by way of satisfaction to injured Justice, (for Christ hath performed that, and Justice were not Justice if it should require sarisfaction twice): but (as I may say) by way of Introduction into Glory; they are by a blessed exchange possessed of Eternal Life, with the loss of a Natural life. Death is not a Penal or Judicial thing in the Saints; for 
Inane est delirium illud Papisticum de exemptione a poeno aeterna, sed non a poena temporali.  the curse and sting is taken away. The same may be said of all the Saints afflictions; they are not properly penal, but rather probational or castigatory; chastisements rather then punishments; they are crosses, not curses; Medicinal, not Maledictory; Physic, not poison; for instruction, not for destruction. O! What comfort is that. There is not now mors in olla, the deadly pottage are healed; though I die, yet I shall not be damned, etc.  
2. The second is exemption from the Rigour of the Law, and its Exaction of Inherent Righteousness. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.   
The Law in its strictness and first constitution, did require of us perfect and personal Obedience, and that upon pain of death, according to its Active condition, Do this and live; Now the Son of God hath in our Nature satisfied the Active demands of the Law, for Believers, as effectually, as if they themselves had made perfect and personal satisfaction thereunto: by virtue whereof they are exempted from the Rigid Exaction of the Law; that is, They are no longer obliged to the performance of Obedience Legally perfect; nor obnoxious to vengeance of the curse for their Legal defects.  
There is a twofold Perfection to be considered, viz.  

1. A Perfection of Degrees. 
Perfectio graduum. Perfectio partium.   
2. A Perfection of Parts.   
The former is Legal Perfection, and it stands in opposition to Imperfection.  
The latter is Evangelical Perfection, and it stands in opposition to Hypocrisy only; for this is that indispensable Gospel-Qualification, Sincerity; This is new and Evangelical Obedience. Now  
Redeemed ones, are, by Christ, who performed Obedience, Personal and Perfect for them, exempted from the former, viz. the severe demands of obedience, absolutely perfect upon pain of death; O what comfort is that to poor sinners! Though many weaknesses attend our duties, and many enormities our life; though it be as Natural for us to sin, as for the spark to fly upwards; for (the Lord knows) It is Natural for us to do that, which without mercy, would undo us. Yet the poor sincere sinner is in Christ accepted, his failings and defects being covered with the robes of the Lord Christ's righteousness. God brings a Believers Obedience to the Touchstone rather than to the Balance; He tries, not weighs it; He eyes the Quality, more than the Quantity; the thing, more than the degrees; He judgeth of Evangelical Obedience, more by the Principle then by the Rule, by the Heart, then by the Law (considered in rigore); It is not; this, or that hast thou done; this or that duty hast thou omitted; this or that sin hast thou committed, etc. But, thus, and thus was thy heart: If there be first a willing mind, it is (now) accepted, 
2 Cor. 8. 12.  etc.  
3. The third is Exemption from the guilt of sin.  
This is the Remission of sin in Justification; which is God's gracious Act of Oblivion and Juridical Acquittance (so to speak) wherein he pardoneth sin in the blood of Christ so, as that it shall not redound to the sinner's punishment. This is a singular piece of the Lord Christ's purchase. God gives his Son, and God doth in him forgive sin. As the Reigning power of sin is taken away in 
Reatus peccati. Regnum peccati.  sanctification, so the guilt of sin is taken off in justification; that is, the justified person is acquitted in Christ, so that God will never deal with him as a 
* Christus suscipiendo poenam & non suscipiendo culpam, & culpam delevit & poenam. Aug. de verb. Dom. serm. 37.  guilty person, or by way of punishment properly; for God doth remit both the guilt and the punishment: so that the afflictions and crosses which justified persons are exposed to in the world (to speak properly) are not penal, but rather probational, (as is showed before) Chastisements, not punishments; for probation, not for reprobation; Tollitur peccatum si non ne SIT, tamen ne OBSIT. O but this is matter of great comfort! I am pardoned now! the Articles of my peace are confirmed now! God is reconciled! I am acquitted! Although there is a defiling power in sin, yet there is not a damning power in sin! etc.  
4. The fourth is Exemption from the Reign and Dominion of sin.  
As in Justification, the vis Damnatrix and Gild of sin is removed; so in Sanctification, the Vis Dominatrix and Reign of sin is removed. There tollitur peccatum, ne OBSIT; Hear tollitur peccatum, ne PRAESIT; There sin loseth its 
* Jam non stimutus sed jubitus, Bernar. Serm. 26. in Cant.  sting, Here sin loseth its strength. A Person is in Sanctification exempted, though not from the Presence, yet from the Power of sin; though not from the Tyranny, yet from the 
* Rom. 6. 14.  Dominion of sin; though not from the Rage, yet from the Reign of sin; though not from the permanency, yet from the predominancy of sin; from the power of, though not from a power to sin. A sanctified soul is neither a Throne not a Sepulchre to sin; though sin remains there, yet sin reigns not there; 
* Rom. 6. 1, 2.  though sin continues in It, yet It continues not in sin; O poor Soul! though sin do sore press thee, yet it shall not oppress thee; the Spirit of Sanctification frees the soul from its Native Captivity and bondage to sin. This is a special part of our Redemption.  
5. The fifth is Exemption from Satanical bondage and subjection.  
Men are by Nature (as Sins, so) Satan's Captives; but the Son of God made of a woman, hath led captivity captive. He is the Seed of the woman, that should bruise the Serpent's head. He is the LYON of the Tribe of Judah, who hath over powered that Roaring Lion, and hath spoiled Principalities and Powers: The Son of God took upon him our Nature, that through death he might destroy him that had the power of death, that is the Devil, Heb. 2. 14. The Son of God became Man, that he might destroy the Devil, in the same Nature that the Devil had destroyed. Satan is now become subject to those, who once were subject to him. Lord, even the DEVILS are subject to US through thy Name, said the Disciples, Luke 10. 17. O how is our captivity turned! The Prince of Darkness is become subject to the meanest Disciple of Christ. Besides the Natural tye that is upon Satan, (he being a creature, and therefore of a limited capacity) by reason whereof he cannot do the evil he would; there is a Providential tie, by reason whereof he doth not the evil he can; yea, and a purchased exemption from subjection to him.  
We must distinguish between 1. Subjection to temptation. And 2. Subjection to the Tempter. The least of Saints are freed from the latter; though the best of Saints are not (in this life) secure from the former. O what comfort is this to a Militant Saint! What though Satan attempt thy ruin? yet know, that Christ will ruin the attempt; He may disquiet thee, but he cannot destroy thee; he may bruise thy heel, but is it not the work of the Seed of the woman to break his head? Satan is Christ's Captive in chains.  
6. The sixth is Exemption from Legal terrors, and fear of Wrath, Hell, Death, etc.  
The former was a freedom from bondage to Spirits, this 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rom. 8. 15. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 2 Tim. 1. 7.  is a freedom from the Spirit of bondage.  
O what fears and terrors is a Reprobate Conscience possessed withal! The Law is violated, Wrath is incurred, Hell and damnation is deserved, as condign punishment; the dreadful pursuits of sin-revenging Justice are unavoidable; my own Conscience accuseth me. O the condemnatory voice of Conscience! that Bosome-hell! Miserable Man that I am; What will become of me? Where shall I dwell for ever? Who shall be my companions to all eternity? Damned Spirits? or the Spirits of just men made perfect? Such terrors and fears are (as it were) a Preface and Introduction to hell. Now Redeemed one's are free from those Legal terrors, and in stead of a Spirit of bondage, they are possessed of the Spirit of Adoption, whereby they cry Abba, Father; And this is that which breeds comfort in life, and confidence at death in the children of God.  
7. The seventh is Exemption from the Ceremonial and Judicial Laws of Moses; That Unsupportable Yoke, which neither the modern Jews, nor their fathers were able to bear. Acts 15. 10.  
This freedom and Immunity are we in a more especial manner to understand by Redemption in the Text. The Jewish Church, like an Heir during his minority, was subject to a pedagogy, viz. the Ceremonial and Judicial Laws of Moses, in which respect the state of the Jews seemed to be a servile-state; but when the fullness of the time was come (even the time of the Church's maturity and riper age) God sent forth his Son made of a woman, to redeem his Church from that bondage and servitude.  
There were three Laws committed to the Jews, viz.  
The 


1. Moral.  
2. Ceremonial.  
3. Judicial.     
The Moral Law was ordained to be a standing and Unalterable Rule of Life and Obedience, both to the Jewish and Christian Church. The Ceremonial and Judicial Laws were Appendices of the Moral Law. The Ceremonial, of the first Table, determining the particulars of that Worship which was peculiar to the Church of the Jews; The Judicial, of the second Table, determining the particulars of that Policy, which was peculiar to the Commonwealth of the Jews. So that the Ceremonial contained the Ecclesiastical Laws of that Church, and did respect God. The Judicial, the Civil Laws of that Commonwealth, and did respect their Neighbour. Now  
Christ did in the fullness of the time redeem his Church both from the Ceremonial and Judicial Laws, as a 
* Gal. 5. 1.  yoke of bondage, imposed not upon the necks, but even upon the Consciences of the Jews, binding them to a strict and accurate observation of the same.  
As touching the Judicial and Civil Law.  
What things soever contained therein were communis juris, of common Equity, and had a foundation in the Law of Nature, and might be enforced by the Law Moral, are still Obligatory to Christians: But, what was peculiar to the constitution of the Judaical Policy, and are not enforceable by any common Right, but were the particular positive Laws of the Jews; do not more bind Christians then any other Municipal Law. For Christ destroying the Jewish Commonwealth, their Temple, and City, according to the Prophecy of Daniel, chap. 9 v. 26, 27. did withal abrogate and destroy the whole Jewish Policy and Laws. And thus it is said, The Priesthood (namely of Aaron) being changed, there is made of necessity a change also of the Law (namely of Moses) Heb. 7. 12.  
As touching the Ceremonial and Ecclesiastical Law.  
That (together with the Judicial Law) might be condered in a fourfold respect, as is evident from Scripture, viz. as  

1. A Badge of distinction between the Jews and all other Nations, Gen. 17. 13, 14.  
2. A Ratified sign of Gild, Col. 2. 14.  
3. A Typical Adumbration of Christ and his Benefits, Heb. 9 9, 10.  
4. A Tutor and Schoolmaster to the Infant-Church, Gal. 4. 1, 2, 3. Now   
The Christian Church is freed from the Ceremonial, (as from the Judicial) Law, in all these respects. For,  
1. Christ hath broken down the middle-wall of partition between Jews and Gentiles, etc. Eph. 2. 14, 15.  
2. Christ hath abolished and taken out of the way the hand-writing of Ordinances, which was against us, etc. Col. 2. 14.  
3. Christ, the Typified Body of Levitical shadows and Adumbrations (Col. 2. 17.) is come.  
4. When the fullness of the time was come, God sent forth his Son made of a woman, etc. to redeem them that were under the Law, (his Church) from a Mosaical pedagogy and Elements. Gal. 4. 4, 5. Then  
1. The Ceremonies are not things Indifferent in the Christian Church. They were abrogated by the Son of God, whose design in coming in the flesh, was, to redeem his Church from that Legal Yoke; so that to obtrude them upon the Gospel-Church, were to frustrate Christians of one great End of the Incarnation; and to infringe their Christian Liberty. (O! How sad is it when men pursue Iniquities for Indifferencies!) Ergo, etc.  

* Do Cas. Cons. lib. 4. cap. 11. Cas. 3.  Baldwin in his Cases of Conscience hath a passage which I cannot omit. Charles the fifth caused a wretched book called INTERIM, to be published, wherein yielding to the Cross, Surplice, Holidays, and other Ceremonies was enjoined, conformity thereunto being much urged by some furious Zelots, who pleaded the Emperor's Commandment in a thing Indifferent; the nonconforming Protestants replied, That the Question was not about a thing Indifferent, etc. The same Reply might we make to those that urge the Ceremonies as Indifferent things: How can those be said to be things Indifferent; which Christ hath abolished? From which he hath Redeemed his Church?  
2. How impudent is the Church of Rome in burdening Christians, with a yoke which neither they nor their fathers were ever able to bear; namely, a heap of superfluous, yea ridiculous, yea impious and Antichristian Ceremonies? But 
Sunt pompae istae omnes & Ceremoniae Papisticae, nihil aliud quam furi meretricii, ad hoc excogitati, ut homines ad spiritualem scortationem alliciantur. Zanchy ad Regin. Elizab. Epistol. lib. 1. pag. 112.  this is like her. Though they are a burden to the better sort of Christians, yet they are a part of her Whorish paint, whereby she endeavours to allure Christians to partake of the cup of her Fornications.  
3. The Ceremonies of the Jewish imposed upon the Christian Church were an Antichristian yoke. What insolent Tyranny is it then in the Romish Church, to obtrude old Rotten Ceremonies, together with a monstrous heap of her own cursed hatching, upon Christians? (I pray God professed Protestants take not pattern by her) its sufficient proof that she is Antichristian, and that THE MYSTERY OF INIQUITY is at 
2 Thess. 2. 7.  work there. By reason of such execrable Tyranny, the case of Christians (I speak it with much regret) is abundantly more sad, and their condition more servile than was that of the Jews; O what pity is that! Observe,  
1. The Ceremonies were imposed upon the Jewish, by God himself; They are imposed upon the Christian Church, by Men like ourselves: There the Jews were the servants of God; Here Christians are made 
* 1 Cor. 7. 23.  the servants of Men. Nay,  
2. The Jewish was an Infant-Church, the Christian is a ripe and Adult-Church; The Jewish-Church was like an Heir under Age, and more servile; The Christian-Church is like an Heir come at Age, and a Redeemed Son, so that Ceremonies are more intolerable in the Christian Church. O how derogatory are they to the Ripe and Mature age of the Church? Num puerescit Ecclesia? Shall the Church always be a child? Away then with Pedagogical and childish Ceremonies. For my part, I think, that the Riper and more Mature the Church is, the more impertinent (to say no more) are Ceremonies; and therefore, the sixteen hundred years (the Age) of the Christian Church considered, the Ceremonies are infinitely more impertinent and slavish (I say no more) now, than they were in the time of her Infancy, yea, than they were in the fifth, yea, than they were in the tenth Century, (& sic deinceps) Ergo, etc. Further,  
3. The Ceremonies were abolished by Him, of whom they were appointed, namely, by Christ, the 
* Col. 1. 18.  Head of the Church: In the Christian Church they are appointed to them, for whom they were abolished; namely, by some Members (rather 
* The Pope is so far from being the Head, that I had rather call him a Monster in, than a Member of the Church.  Monsters) of the Church.  
But  
4. What more horrid Sacrilege, then to rob Christians of that Liberty and Freedom, which the Lord Christ hath procured and purchased for them with the meritoricus price of his dearest blood? Now such is their Exemption from the servile yoke of Rites and Ceremonies in the Worship of God under the Gospel Ergo, etc. Ah! Rome! Rome! The Lord rebuke thee.  

* Quamvis enim neque hoc inveniri possit, quomodo contra fidem sint; ipsam tamen Religionem, quam Dei miserecordia liberam esse voluit, servilibus oneribus premunt: ut tolerabilior sit conditio Judaeorum, qui etiamsi tempus libertatis non agnoverunt, legalibus tamen sarcinis, non Humanis praesumptionibus subjiciuntur. Aug. ad Januar. de Ritibus Eccles. Epist. 119. cap. 19 Vid. Aug. ad Januar. de Variis Consuetud. Region. Epist. 118. cap. 2.  S. Augustine complained grievously of Ceremonies wherewith the Church was burdened in his time; (O how much more may we complain of the same in our time!)  
Although (saith he) they were not things contrary to the Analogy of Faith, yet Religion which God in mercy and pity (to his Church) would have to be free, is burdened thereby, as with a slavish yoke; insomuch that the servile condition of the Jews was more tolerable (then that of Christians) because they were subject to LEGAL and Divine Impositions, not to HUMAN Presumptions.  
Thus S. Augustine complained that in his days the Christian Church was more plagued and burdened with rotten Ceremonies, than was the Jewish Church in her time. I pray God We have not cause to complain, that the Church is burdened with a heavier yoke in our days, than she was in S. Augustine's time; Where then were our Christian pre-eminence to the Jews? men's fiercelyzealous contentions for a numerous heap of Jewish-Popish Ceremonies and Innovations in the Worship of God, are sad, sad Prognostics thereof. Give me leave to add, That the Retention and pursuance of such things in the Christian Church, would prove,  
1. A Load and burden to Religion; and then might it not justly be feared, that Religion itself would become burdensome? O let Men take heed, lest, by burdening Religion (as S. Augustine phraseth it) they make Religion become a burden!  
2. A Bar to the Jews conversion. I much wonder, with what confidence we could Woo or Court the Jew to our Religion, as long as we press or retain a Legal yoke of Ceremonies in the Worship of God, which in the respects aforesaid, is more intolerable, then was that, which neither the (later) Jew's, nor their fathers were able to bear, we should urge them but with mean success, to cast off a Divine, and to submit their necks to a Human yoke; Sure the Jew might hope for Exemption from the hand-writing of Ordinances, and burdensome observance of Legal Types and Shadows, by the Messiah, when come; But alas, their hopes would receive little life or strength from the Gospel-Church! Nay  
Is not their Unbelief and Incredulity touching the Messiah strengthened and confirmed from the retention of those very things in the Christian-Church, whereby he was typed and presigured? Is it not probable that this might prove an Obstruction to their conversion? For aught I know, had not adulterate Rome been in the way, JERUSALEM had borrowed as much from LONDON (long ere now) as ROME hath from JERUSALEM, in point of Divine Worship; What? And are Ceremonies still a 
* Eph. 2. 14.  middle wall of Partition between Jews and Gentiles?  
3. A Hindrance and Impediment to the Churches gradual Excellencies, growth, and propagation. The Riper and more mature the Church is, she should be for Knowledge more Eminent; for Doctrine more Powerful; for Discipline more Regular; for Worship more Pure; etc.  
In conclusion.  
Ceremonies may not be retained;  
1. As a Wall of Partition between Jews and Gentiles. Nor 2. As a sign of sin-guiltiness. Nor 3. As Typical and Figurative. Nor 4. As Rudimental or Pedagogical.  
(For that were to Judaize.)  
Nor 5. As things Sacred and Holy. Nor 6. As matter of Worship. Nor 7. As matters of Necessity, and Obligatory to Conscience. Nor 8. As things of a Spiritual Efficacy. Nor 9 As matters of Merit. Nor 10. As matters of Perfection. Nor 11. As things of a Teaching Quality. (The Church of Rome is like to be well taught) but do they not in point of Use, tend more to destruction then to instruction?) Well,  
That were to Romanize.  
Nor 12. When Scandal doth from thence accrue to tender Consciences. Nor 13. When they are abused to Idolatry or Superstition.  
If these respects be excluded from the Ceremonies, a very little matter would make me (caeteris paribus) turn Proselyte. I am for Ornamenta, but not for Onera in the Church. They miserably err (in my mind) who interpret the Churches Burden to be the Church's Beauty!  
Thus I have dispatched the seventh step of Christian  
Liberty.  
8. The eighth (which is consequentially dependant thereon) is Exemption from all Bond of Conscience in respect of things Indifferent; these are things neither commanded nor forbidden in the Eternal Law of God. This is in a more especial manner called Liberty of Conscience, and it hath a twofold reference; namely,  

1. To the Creatures of God.  
2. To Humane Ordinances in things Indifferent.   
1. As touching the Creatures.  
Christians are freed from scrupulosity of Conscience, in respect of them, and from the Legal observance of the difference of meats, clean and unclean, made by the Ceremonial Law, that being taken away under the Gospel: Hence said Christ, Not that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man, Matth. 15. 11. And the Apostle Paul after him, I know, and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that there is nothing unclean (or common) * of itself, Rom. 14. 
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  14. Now, Every creature of God is good, and nothing to be refused, if it be received with Thanksgiving, 1 Tim. 4. 4. Now, all things are lawful, 1 Cor. 6. 12. Now, unto the pure all things are pure, Tit. 1. 15. This Liberty is an Evangelical Privilege, whereby a true Christian may with a safe and free Conscience, use or forbear any of the Creatures of God appointed for his use.  
2. As touching the Ordinances of Men in things Indifferent. Certain it is, that the Conscience of a Christian cannot be bound thereby, but is free from the Obligatory virtue of all Human Commandments. For my more distinct proceeding, I shall express myself in these following propositions, whereof some be gradual.  
1. 
* Vid. Ames. de Cons, lib. 1. cap. 2. Perk. Treat. of Cons. cap. 2. sect. 3. Alsted. Theol. Caf. cap. 2.  He is said to bind the Conscience, who hath such a strict and Immediate Authority over it, as that Conscience ought to be subject thereunto; insomuch that what is contrary to it, is sin. A binding Power, is an Ordering and (as it were) a Coactive Power. To urge and enforce Conscience ad assensum vel dissensum, to assent to a thing as lawful, or that aught to be done, or to descent from a thing as unlawful, or that ought not to be done, may be said to bind Conscience. Vid. Ames. de Cons. lib. 1. cap. 3. Item Calv. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. § 5.  
2. God alone can bind Conscience. And in this sense, He is said to be our only Lawgiver, Jam. 4. 12. Imperial Authority and Jurisdiction over Conscience is peculiar to God alone. Hence saith 
* Com. in 1 Pet. 5. 3. Neque enim cum huminibus sed cum uno Deo, negotium est Conscientiis nostris, Calvin. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. Sect. 5. Erga animas & conscientias nostras, nemini quicquam juris nisi Deo. Tilen. Synt. part. 2. Disp. 32. Thef. 4. Liberi sumus ab omnibus humanis Ritibus, Quantum quidem ad Conscientiam attinet. Hemming. Enchyr. clas. 3. cap. 14. Ab omni traditionum humanarum jugo, liberas habent conscientias (fideles) cum solius Dei sit, res ad Religionem pertinentes praescribere. Profess. Leidens. Synt. pur. Theol. Disp. 35. etc.  Luther, Vnum Dominum habemus, qui animas nostras gubernat; We have but one Lord and Governor of our souls.  
From hence it is evident, that the binding and obliging Power over the Conscience is peculiar to God, 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 But  
3. The Laws of God, wherein were determined those particulars which are neither commanded nor forbidden in the Moral Law of God, are abrogated; Now those were the Ceremonial and Judicial Laws of Moses; the one determining Ecclesiastical, the other Civil matters, peculiar to the Jewish Church, and Commonwealth. From both which Christ (as hath been said) hath exempted the Christian Church. Now  
4. The Laws of Men (whether Civil or Ecclesiastical (as such) are not properly Binding or Obligatory to Conscience. God is (as hath been said) the sole Lord of Conscience. As for Human Laws and Ordinances; neither is simple Obedience due unto them; neither doth a thing which in respect of the Law Moral is Indifferent, that is, neither commanded nor forbidden, by virtue of them become simply necessary. They are Declarative only, not Authoritative: that is, they declare what is fittest to be done in things which are Indifferent, and cannot be enforced, either by the Law of God or Nature. There is in them a Directive Power, but not a Coactive Jurisdiction. They have only vim dirigendi & monendi saith 
* Synt. part. 2. Disp. 27. Thes. 39 Vid. Marcum Antonium de Dom. de Repub. Eccles. lib. 5. cap. 2. N. 12 Chem. exam. 2. de bon. Oper. p. 179. Calvin. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. Sect. 6. Ames. de Cons. lib. 1. cap. 2.  Tilenus.  
And hence is that charge of the Apostle to the Corinthians, Ye are bought with a price, be not ye the servants of 
1 Cor. 7. 23.  men, (which we are not to understand of subjection to Magistrates, or of External servitude, but of the bondage of Conscience.) And that to the Colossians, Let no man 
Col. 2. 16.  judge you (or usurp power over the Conscience) in meat, or in drink, or in respect of a holy day. And hence is that sharp reproof, Why are ye subject to Ordinances, Touch not, 
Col. 2. 20, 21.  Taste not, Handle not? that is, Why do ye observe Human Traditions, as if the Conscience were bound by them? etc. 
* Conc. Trid. ●●ss. 4.  Cursed is the Tyranny of the Romish Church, which imposeth her Heterodox Traditions upon Conscience, teaching that they are with like reverence to be embraced, a● the Written Word of God.  
5. The Oligatory and Binding Power of Human Laws, whether Ecclesiastical or Civil, is, Vis quaedam Divina, Divine Authority. This is Ratio Legis, the very Reason of the Law; without which the Law itself can never bind. There must be more of REASON then of WILL in all Human Ordinances; though WILL without enquiry after REASONS, is Obligatory in Divine Ordinances: Now the REASON of Man's Law, can be no other, than the WILL of God in his Law.  
As touching Ecclesiastical Laws.  
It is not the Authority of the Church, of Councils, or Convocations, but the Matter of the Canon, not Ratio Precipientis, but Ratio Praecepti, that binds. In a word,  
There must be in all Ecclesiastical Laws and Constitutions, 1. Conformity to the Word of God, that is the Rule. 2. They must Manifestam Vtilitatem prae se far (saith 
* Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. Sect. 32  Calvin) they must serve as to the Glory of God, so for the Public Good; this must be the End. They must tend to the maintaining of Unity, (as of Verity) these must not be separated) Order and Decency, to the preventing of Scandal, without Impositions upon Conscience, or the infringing of the purchased Liberty thereof: Else to Obey Ecclesiastical Canons, were not (believe it) 
Vid. Jun. Animadv. in Bellarm. controv. 3. lib. 4. cap. 16. Item Thes. Theol. de lib. Christ. Thes. 11. Tilen. Synt. part. 2. disp. 27. Thes. 39 Item Thes. 9 Alsted. Theol. Cas. cap. 2. Hospin. de Orig. Fest. Christ. cap. 2. Bez. Conf. cap. 5. art 16. Paraeum, comment. in 1 Cor. 14. Calvin. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. sect. 32. Item Resp. ad lib. de Pii viri officio, pag. 413. Prof. Leid. Synt. pur. Theol. Disp. 35. Thes. 19 Jus Canon. decret. part. 1. dict. 61. c. 8. Perkins Treat. of Cons. cap. 2. sect. 8. etc.  CANONICAL OBEDIENCE.  
As touching Civil Laws.  
We are bound in Conscience to observe the Magistrates Commandments. Though we are not bound in Conscience 
Quamvis ad Justas Leges humanas, justo modo observandas, obligentur homines in Conscientiis suis a Deo; ipse tamen Leges humanae, qua sunt Leges hominum, non obligant Conscientiam. Ames. de Cons. lib. 1. cap. 2.  BY those Commandments, as such.  
Obedience (Active or Passive) to the Magistrates commands is necessary; though not Necessitate consequentis, yet Necessitate consequentiae; that is, Though they are not Obligatory to Conscience (
* Pros. Leid. Synt. pur. Theol. Disp. 35. Thes. 39  primo & per se) primarily, directly. and by virtue of any Genuine binding power In themselves, and as such; yet they are binding by virtue of 1. The Lawfulness of the matter commanded; and 2. God's 
* Exod. 20. 12. Rom. 13. 1, 2. 1 Pet. 2. 13, 14.  General Precept touching indispensable Obedience (Active or Passive) to the Magistrates Commandments. In which respect we must 
* Rom. 13. 5.  be subject even for Conscience sake. Thus, though this, viz. The lawful Commandments of the Magistrate are necessarily to be obeyed, is not true by the simple necessity of the Consequent, as an Axiom and Principle manifest of itself, or by a simply necessary Connexion between the Antecedent and Consequent, or Subject and Predicate, viz. The Lawful Commandments of the Magistrate, and Necessary Obedience. Yet, it is true by the 
In Divinis ad Praecipientem, In Humanis ad Praeceptum respiciendum est.  necessity of consequence, that is, such a necessity as may be sound concluded from the Law of God, wherein Obedience to the Lawful Commandments of Magistrates is Indispensably commanded; so that it is a Conclusion manifest by Discourse; and thus, upon these Premises, viz. 1. That all lawful Commandments of Magistrates are necessarily by virtue of God's Commandment to be obeyed. And 2. That this or that is a lawful Command of the Magistrate. It will follow Necessitate consequentiae, That This or that Commandment of the Magistrate, is necessarily to be obeyed. In a word,  
There be two things which oblige us to obey the Magistrates Commandments. 1. The one is, the Matter of the Human Precept, which must be Consonant, at least, not Repugnant to the Law of God. 2. The other is, The Authority of the Divine Precept, wherein (as hath been said) Indispensable Obedience to the Lawful Commandments of Magistrates is enjoined.  
From what hath been said, it is evident, That  
Human Laws are Obligatory and Authentic, only by virtue of the Law of God; their binding Power being purely Mutuatitious. We are to obey the Magistrate, and all that are in Authority, so far forth, as that in obeying them we obey God; the Great Lawgiver. Vid. Alsted. Theol. Cas. cap. 2. Prof. Leid. Synt. pur. Theol. Disp. 35. Thes. 19 But  
Quaest. What if the Magistrate command things which Conscience will not suffer to conform unto?  
Answ. 1. Subjection to Magistrates and Loyalty is an Indispensable duty; It is very observable, that none of the Apostles did more urge and enforce that Duty, then S. Paul did, though he was a Subject to the greatest Tyrant that ever lived, namely that Monster of Mankind, Nero Caesar, who was the Author of the * First Persecution, and is called 
Nero ex Caesaribus primus in Christianos distrinxit gladium.  by 
* Apolog. 5.  Tertullian, Dedicator Damnationis Nostrae, the first that made a Law to condemn Christians to death.  
2. There is (according to some of the Learned) a great difference between Subjection and Obedience; Subjection (saith 
* Of the Church. lib. 4. cap. 34.  D. Field) is generally and absolutely required, where Obedience is not; as when Conscience suffers not a Man (Actively) to Obey, yet Duty leads him (by Passive Obedience) to submit and subject himself to Authority; and thus the 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, Rom. 13. 1. 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, 1 Pet. 2. 13.  Greek word notes Submission or Subjection in Scripture; which is much to be observed, lest in stead of submitting, Men either (by Active Obedience) conform contrary to Conscience, or (which Piety abhors) rebel contrary to duty. Thus, had I been an Inferior 
Note, It is one thing to obey Nero the Magistrate, another to obey Nero's Commandment.  Magistrate under Nero, and by him commanded to execute that cursed Edict of his, touching the condemning of Christians to death, I would not have (Actively) obeyed him, neither would I have rebelled: What then? Why, I would have offered him my Neck (through passive strength from the Almighty) not my hand. The same may be said in respect of the controverted Ceremonies, when imposed by Authority; though I cannot conform to them, yet (through the Grace of God) I shall never rebel; but according to Scripture injunction, I will submit to the Higher Power, whether it be to the KING 
1 Pet. 2. 13, 14.  as Supreme, or unto Governors, as unto them that are sent by Him. Let men know then, that there is a Medium between Active Obedience and Rebellion, viz. SUBMISSION. The Lord forgive them that interpret Nonconformity to the Mitre, to be no less, than Disloyalty to the Crown; The latter (I thank God) I am taught of him to abhor. Again,  
3. I like well that distinction of 
* Parker of the Cross, cap. 5. sect. 14, 15.  Non Obedire, and Nolle Obedire; the one is no more than not to conform by Active Obedience. The other is, Obstinate Disobedience and Contempt, which is ever to be avoided.  
But  
Quest. How are Magistratical Injunctions in things Indifferent, and Indispensable Obedience thereunto, consistent with Liberty of Conscience?  
Answer.  
6. Liberty and Limitations are not inconsistent. A Spiritual and Internal Liberty may very well consist with Extrinsecal Limitations. That we may the better apprehend this, let us consider, That  
There is a twofold Restraint; namely,  

1. One upon the Conscience and Inner Man.  
2. Another upon the Person, and Outward Man.   
Now,  
There may be a Restraint upon the Person, when (yet) there is no Constraint upon the Conscience of a Man; and therefore we must distinguish between 1. The Right and Truth of Liberty, and 2. The Use and Exercise of Liberty. Libertas Conscientiae, and Ligatio Conscientiae (considered 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, etc.) are inconsistent; Liberty of Conscience is opposed only to bond of Conscience, not to an  Restraint of the Outward Man, in respect of the Exercise of our Liberty. Undoubtedly there may be a Restriction upon the Practice, or upon the Person, as to the Use of his Liberty; and yet 1. Nothing derogatory to the Indifferency of the thing in itself. Nor 2. Any violence offered to the Internal and Real Liberty of Conscience; even as the Actus Imperati may be hindered or restrained, without any violence offered to the Actus Eliciti of the Soul. And thus, who doth doubt but that the King (our Dear and Dread Sovereign) may on a Civil account, for the public good of his Kingdoms, enjoin his Subject's abstinence from such and such Meats, etc. Now, here were a Restraint upon Persons, in respect of the Use and Exercise of their Liberty; and yet no violence offered (upon the King's part) to the Internal Liberty of Conscience; for though the Outward Man is restrained by the Civil Sword, yet the Inner Man, and Conscience is left free; that is, My Conscience is not bound by the Magistrate's Commandment, though I be bound in Conscience by virtue of the Law of God, to yield Obedience to that Commandment, the matter thereof being a thing Indifferent, and (therefore) lawful. Though I be tied up by the Command as to practise, yet my Conscience is still free, while I am persuaded in Conscience that the thing is in itself Indifferent: Why may not I give my neck to my King, and yet keep my Conscience for my God? Why may not I yield my Outward Man to the Civil Sceptre of the King, Qui (vel) Nolentibus praeest, saith Jerome, and yet resign my Inner Man to the Divine Sceptre of my God, to whom appertains Interior Animae Gubernatio, as 
* Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. sect. 5.  Calvin words it?  
The same may be said in respect of Clothing. Doubtless the King may for the good of his Subjects, on some emergent occasions, confine them to one kind of Cloth, one kind of Colour, one kind of Habit, while neither Conscience is imposed upon, nor a Religious account urged; for the Restraint would in such a case be; not upon the Conscience, while it is still persuaded of the Indifferency of the thing in itself, and that it is not urged on a Religious, but a Civil account, and for the Weal-public; but only upon Persons in respect of the Indifferent Exercise of their Liberty.  
Once more,  
What reason is there to doubt but that the King may for the Public Good of his Kingdoms, tie his Subjects to eat Swine's flesh for some weeks, once a year? Yea, (and as the occasion shall vary) at other times to abstain from Swine's flesh for some weeks? Now, here were a Restraint upon the Person in respect of the Exercise of his Liberty, and yet none upon the Conscience in respect of the Reality of his Liberty, while he is persuaded in Conscience, that the thing is Indifferent in itself, and in respect of the Law of God, though now it ceaseth to be Indifferent in its Use, by reason of the Law of Man, viz. the Magistrate, whose Commandments in things Indifferent we are bound in Conscience to observe.  
All which, that we may the better understand, let us consider, That  
1. Christian Liberty in respect of things Indifferent, consists, in usu vel abstinentia, (saith 
* Synt. Theol. lib. 6. cap. 33.  Polanus); tam in abstinendo, quam in utendo (saith 
* Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19 sect. 10.  Calvin); in use or abstinence, indifferently. Now  
2. Here is Liberty, namely, That I may with a Conscience free from all Divine Obligation to the contrary, observe Human Constitutions made, pro re nata, upon various (yea contrary) occasions emergent, for the Public Good, that is, the good of that City, Kingdom or Body-Politick, whereof I am a Member. For instance, Possibly it is necessary at one time, for the Public good, that there be an Universal Use of Swine's flesh (it may be to save other Beasts, or because of excessive plenty) Now, by virtue of my Christian Liberty, I may with a free Conscience, observe a Statute made by the Magistrate, for the Universal Use of Swine's flesh: A Jewish Magistrate might make no such Law. Again, possibly it is as necessary at another time that there be an Universal Abstinence from Swine's flesh, (it may be for Health's sake, or scarcity, etc.) Now by virtue of my Christian Liberty, I may with a free Conscience observe a Statute made by the Magistrate, (upon a quite contrary occasion viz.) for an Universal Abstinence from Swine's flesh, etc. Wither we use or abstain, the Conscience is never the less free; yea, therefore because we are free; libera Conscientia (utimur vel) abstinemus, we use or forbear with a free Conscience. Vid. Calvin. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19 Sect. 10.  
Nay,  
By virtue of my Liberty, I may abridge myself of Liberty. By virtue of the undoubted Reality of it, I may limit myself as to the Indifferent use of it.  
Here is Liberty, that I may freely impose a Necessity upon my Liberty, 
* Calv. Instit. lib. 4. cap. 10. sect. 32.  quatenus 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉, aut Charitatis ratio exigit.  
Here is Liberty, namely, That (notwithstanding the Indifferency of things in themselves, yet) I may freely tie myself to, or from such and such meats or such and such , in respect of Decency or Charity, or warrantable Congruity and Pleasingness to my own mind, etc.  
Finally,  
They are much mistaken, who think that the Magistrates Imposition in a thing Indifferent, takes away, or infringeth Liberty of Conscience; for who knows not that This is a thing Indifferent, namely, to begin Sabbathical Duties at four or six a clock in the morning? I prove it, (Though, the Observance of the Christian Sabbath be of Indispensable Necessity, (I am no Anti-Sabbatarian, yet) to begin the Sabbath then, is neither Forbidden nor Commanded; to begin it then, or sooner, or somewhat later, is not repugnant to the Word, Ergo, etc. Now, May not the Magistrate tie me (yea, and all his other Subjects) to six or four a Clock in the morning for the beginning of the Sabbath? Yes, That he may; and yet say, if in so doing, he doth infringe Christian Liberty. No Imposition is repugnant to Liberty of Conscience, but Imposition upon Conscience. What I have said doth not at all countenance Ceremonies, since (as is evident from what hath been said above) they are justly denied to be Matters of Indifferency, (about which Liberty of Conscience is most properly Conversant.) I would they would decide the Controversy, by their, unheard of, Achillean proofs. Parturiunt montes etc.  
Thus I have endeavoured to show (which is a difficult theme to such a raw head) how the Magistrates Impositions in things Indifferent; & Necessary Obedience thereunto are consistent with Liberty of Conscience.  
The Boundaries or Rules of Liberty of Conscience follow, which may be said to be five. Viz.  
1. Piety; This is Loyalty to God, specified, 1 Cor. 10. 31. Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or whatsoever 
See Rom. 14. 7, 8 Etiam illaeactiones quae sunt sua natura Adtaphorae debent tamen a Christianis fieri in nomine Christi, hoc est juxta voluntatem Christi, & ad gloriam Christi. D. Davenant in locum.  ye do, do all to the Glory of God. The End of our Liberty is God's GLORY; this should be the Scope of all our Actions, even of Indifferent ones. Our Own Good is subordinate not  to That.  
2. Loyalty. This is enjoined Subjection to the Magistrate, who is (as it were) God's Viceroy here on earth in respect of the Civil Sword entrusted by the King of 
See Rom. 13. 1, 2.  Kings to him; Submit yourselves (saith Peter) to every Ordinance of Man for the Lords sake, whether it be to the King as Supreme, etc. 1 Pet. 2. 13, 14.— as free, etc. v. 16. Observe, As free, there is Liberty; but yet submit AS free; there is a Limitation. Then ours is a Limited Liberty.  
3. Charity. By this we are restrained from the use of any thing from whence scandal and just offence might accrue to weak Brethren. Take heed (saith our Apostle) lest by any means this Liberty of yours become a stumbling block to the weak. 1 Cor. 8. 9 It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink Wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother stumbleth, or is offended, or made weak. Rom. 14. 21. Hence said S. Paul, If meat make my Brother to offend (or stumble) I will eat no flesh while the World stands. 1 Cor. 8. 13. Cum charitas semper sit colenda, scandala semper sunt vitanda, said 
* Synt. part. 2 disp. 27. Thess. 31.  Tilenus. Since Charity is ever to be entertained, Scandal is ever to be avoided. By virtue of this Law of Charity we are tied not only from the use of what might prove Scandalous and Offensive to weak Brethren, but also to the use and pursuance of such things as are 
† Vid. Par. in 1 Cor. 10. 23. Vid. Calvin Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19 sect. 12.  Expedient and Edisicatory. Let us therefore follow after the things which make for peace, and things wherewith one may edify another. Rom. 14. 19 etc.  
Quest. Is there not sometimes a repugnancy between the Law of Charity and the Law of Loyalty: as when the Magistrate commands That, which if we should observe, we should offend and scandalise the weak? Let us suppose, the Magistrate to enjoin a Common-Prayer to be read; If I should read it, I should scandalise weak Christians; if I should not read it, I should seem to disobey the Magistrate; what shall I do in such a case? I must not scandalise him for whom Christ died; I but neither must I disobey the Magistrate.  
Answ. 
* Doctrine of Christian Liberty.  Dr. Downame, presents us with This, as an expedient in this case of seeming Antinomy; namely, That if we answer or obey the Superior Law, viz. that concerning the Magistrate, the Inferior, viz. that concerning the weak Brethren (which giveth place to the other) is not broken or disobeyed, etc. And I must confess there is much in it, and I can but commend the Drs Invention; but yet under favour,  
2. There had been more in it, if this had been supposed, namely, That not only the Magistrates Command but also his Conscience comes in competition with the weak Brother's Conscience; that is, If the Magistrate himself had been supposed to be of a tender Conscience. For then, we should seem by gratifying others, not only to disobey the Magistrate, but also to offend and scandalise his tender Conscience. However,  
3. Since I am so weak as not to pick satisfaction here, I should betake myself to Passive Obedience: I dare not conform by Active Obedience, for than I should with my 
Rom. 14. 15.  meat destroy him for whom Christ died. I dare not out of a respect to the Consciences of Inferior Christians oppose or contemn Authority; God forbidden. Rebellion and Religion my principles could never yet reconcile; and I have ever thought, that it is not only sin, but even a misery 
Quod ad scandalum atimet. Vid. Magdeburg. Cent. 1. lib. 2. cap. 4. col. 441. Aug. Epist. 36. ad Casul. Zanch. de Imag. Pag. 390. Chemnit. exam. part. 1. pag. 179. Par. in Rom. 14. dub. 1. Calv. Instit. lib. 3. cap. 19 sect. 11, 12, 13. etc.  to labour with Antimagistratical Principles. Therefore I would choose that which I am persuaded in Conscience, to be the pars tutior, the safer way; namely, to Submit: this is Passive Obedience; whereby I shall hope to eshun both the one and the other evil.  
4. Purity. This is another Rule and Boundary of Liberty of Conscience, which is mentioned Rom. 14. 14. I am persuaded that there is nothing unclean 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  of itself, there is Liberty; but to him that esteemeth any thing to be unclean, to him it is unclean; there is a Limitation. He that doubteth is damned if he eateth, because he eateth not of faith, for what is not of faith is sin. Rom. 14. 23. That 
In this case the Magistrate may Command lawfully, and (yet) the Subject obey sin fully.  is, if a man be not fully persuaded of the lawfulness of what he doth, he sins: Hence saith the Apostle, Let every man be fully persuaded in his own mind; Rom. 14. 5. This is that Plerophory of Conscience without which a thing is  and Unlawful to us, though it be Lawful in its own Nature. Hence saith 
* In Rom. 14. 7, 8. Vid. Calv. in v. 14.  Calvin, Nefas omnino est quipptam aggredi quod putes (Domino) displicere, imo quod non persuasus fis illi placere; It is unlawful for thee to attempt any thing which thou thinkest may displease God, yea, which thou dost not persuade thyself to be a thing that will please God. Thus, If a thing should be enjoined whereof (though) I could question neither the Composition nor the Imposition; (yet) if I should use or attempt it against or with a Reluctancy of, Conscience I should sin; For 
* Vid. Calv. in Rom. 14. 5. Alsted. Theol. Cas. cap. 2.  Quicquid fit repugnante Conscientia peccatum est, whatever is done contrary to the Voice, Dictates and Testimony of Conscience, that Bosome-Guide, is a sin: yea, The 
† Vid. Hemming. Enchyr. Class. 2. cap. 7. Aquin. 1. 2. Quest. 19 Art. 5. Tanner. Jesuit. to 2 in 12. disp. 2. q. 4. dub. 2. n. 21. Baldwin. de Cons. Cas. lib. 1. cap. 7. Ames. de Cons. lib. 1. cap. 4. etc.  Learned tell us that in things Indifferent (at least), even an Erroneous Conscience ligat, though non obligat. It binds, by a Negative tye; that is, though we are not obliged to do what it prescribeth, yet we are bound not to do what it condemneth or forbiddeth. The reason whereof must be, the Representation of the Will of God therein; for an Erroneous Conscience judgeth itself to act by Rule.  
5. Sobriety. This is another Boundary of Liberty of Conscience. Brethren (saith the Apostle) ye are called to liberty, only use not your liberty as an occasion to the flesh. Gal. 5. 13. That were to pass the bounds of Sobriety, Temperance, Humility, Frugality, Modesty, etc. That were not a holy Liberty but a sinful Licentiousness. That were not the Use but the Abuse of our Liberty. These are the Bounds of our Liberty of Conscience.  
And thus I have dispatched the last step of Christian Liberty; and the first Capital Privilege, viz. Redemption. O how doth it concern us, to contend for what Christ hath procured! Periculosum est in divinis rebus ut quis cedat jure suo, said Cyprian, de Haeret. baptiz. vid. Par. Comment. in 1 Cor. 7. 23. Tilen. Synt. part 2. disp. 44. Thes. 33.  
The other great Evangelicall Privilege is, Adoption.  
One great design of the Son of God, in assuming to himself our Nature, was; That we might 
* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  receive the Adoption of Sons. Here is noted the filial state of the Church; not, but that all the Saints in the Jewish Church, were Sons, but because the condition of the Jewish Church considered as a Collective Body, was by reason of the Legal 
Non dixit Apostolus, accipiamus, sed, recipiamus, ut significaret hoc nos amisisse in Adam ex quo mortales sumus. Aug. in loc.  YOKE of Rites and Ceremonies more servile than that of the Christian Church.  
Adoption is that Evangelicall Privilege, wherein the Natural Sons of sinful Men, become the Adoptive Sons of the Living God. It is peculiar to Believers, the Lords Redeemed ones. Christ is the Son of God by Natural, Eternal, and Ineffable Generation, Angels are Sons of God by Creation; but Men (viz. Believers) are Sons of God by Adoption. There be two great and admirable truths in the Text.  

1. Here, The Son of God became the Son of Man. God sent forth his Son made of a Woman.  
2. Here, The Sons of Men became the Sons of God. That we might receive the Adoption of Sons.   

* 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉. Chrys. in Joh. cap 1.  The Son of God became the Son of Man, that the Sons of Men might become the Sons of God.  
O what Comfort is this to Redeemed Ones! what? that Slaves should become Sons! that such as are by Nature the children of wrath, should through Grace, become 
Eph. 2. 3.  the Children of the Most High God etc.  
This Theme doth well deserve another Treatise; but I must conclude.  
Use 4. Here is a Motive to Thankfulness.  
Here is the most quickening Motive to Gratitude, Praise, and Thanksgiving, that Heaven can afford to Mankind: What? That the Son of God should be made of a woman, for the Redemption, Adoption, Salvation of Sinners! Angels paid a Tribute of Praise for this Contrivance; Glory to God in the highest, said they. Surely Men are much 
Luk. 2. 14.  more concerned, since God took not upon him the Nature of Angels but the Seed of Abraham. O Let Men henceforth 
Heb. 2. 16.  become Tributaries to the most High God bless God Christians, writ a Law of thankfulness upon your hearts, and Copy it out in your Lives. Bless God Captives, here is a Redeemer! Bless God Sinners, here is a Saviour! One of your own flesh and blood! O let us begin our eternal work, where I end. I dare say, this is a Theme, which ten thousand times ten thousand and thousands 
Rev. 5. 11.  of thousands, even the whole Host of Heaven will with praises Celebrate and Comment upon to all Eternity.  
〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉 〈◊〉.  
FINIS.